The Federation and Starfleet

[section31agent]

More questions. Who decides? Do all active members have the same number and voting power? Or is there an elected council that makes membership decisions?

If you ever get the chance to watch the TOS ep "Journey to Babel", you might want to watch it. This ep partially deals with the matter of membership admission.

By the way, this episode reinforces the idea that Fed members are independent sovereign entities.

This is one of Kirk's captain's log from the ep:
"We have departed Vulcan for the neutral planetoid code-named Babel. Since it is in our sector, the Enterprise has been assigned to transport ambassadors of Federation planets to this vitally important council. The issues of the council are politically complex, the passengers explosive."

Each member planet is represented by an ambassador, which indicates that member planets are independent and sovereign in their own right. What Kirk said also implies that the Federation council is not really a legislature, in the sense of it being a national governing body.

With individual nation-states allowed to govern themselves on local matters within broad guidelines.

Perhaps a better way of thinking about this, is this: it is not so much that individual nation-states, or planets in this case, are allowed to govern themselves. It is the other way around.

UFP members are absolutely sovereign. The Fed is allowed to have whatever powers the members grant or yield to it. And for the Federation, the powers that it is granted seem to be generally limited to the areas of defense/security and diplomacy. And what is granted, could be taken back by the members.

Actually this episode is the best argument that the Federation members are sovereign states (and that I'm wrong lol). An "ambassador" does imply that they are representatives of a sovereign government.

It may be that early on in the series they were still working out the background details (ie Starfleet Control, UESPA, and what the Federation is exactly). But you'll notice in later episodes, Sarek is called Ambassador Sarek, or Federation Ambassador more often than the "Vulcan Ambassador". This would be more accurate because if he only represents the Vulcan government he cannot possibly negotiate a treaty between the Legarans and the entire Federation. Of course, he can still be called Vulcan ambassador, as in hes an ambassador who also happens to be a Vulcan.

I will admit though, if you only look at TOS, episodes like this make it a little bit less clear. But if you look at the franchise as a whole, to me, I think it's pretty clear. I mean the Federation Council can order its citizens on Dorvan V to evacuate over the objections of the Dorvan V leaders. The Dorvan V representative gets to have a say at the Federation Council, but once the council votes, the decision is final. If you don't evacuate, Starfleet security officers can come down and remove you by force. That to me is pretty clear that the federal government is boss, much like the US, Canada and every other federal republic in the world

 

[Timo]

It's unfortunate that the lingua franca used is so imprecise: is "the Vulcan ambassador" supposed to mean the man who represents Vulcan, or the representative who is Vulcan or comes from Vulcan? In other words from this confusing language, are we talking about the African-American Ambassador (of, say, Peru!) or the Ambassador from and for the countries (?) of Africa and America?

Language used elsewhere in TOS would seem to support the "he's Vulcan" interpretation over the "he represents Vulcan" one: Spock is qualified with the term "half-Vulcan" often enough in official contexts.

As for the "franchise in general" issue, I think we can draw all sorts of distinctions at our leisure, to create the sort of Federation we want to see. Perhaps "colonies" have lesser powers than "members", and the actual "owners" of Dorvan V (say, the hubworld of New Cahokia) dictated the fate of the colonists without even needing to get the approval of other members?

As for "Journey to Babel", it cannot be emphasized enough that these delegates of a rather impromptu-sounding conference were about to vote on an ultimate joint decision where Vulcan or Tellar had no further leeway. This was not "the Federation Council in action" or anything close to it. For all we know, the Ambassadors were to slug it out first, finding facts just like they did in DS9 "The Forsaken", and then informing their actual governments on how they should vote in the aftermath of the conference.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[T'Girl]

Each member planet is represented by an ambassador, which indicates that member planets are independent and sovereign in their own right.

In the animated series, Federation members exchange ambassadors between each other. And in the ST Eleven prequel tie-in comic, the Federation sends ambassadors to it's members (Picard is the Federation ambassador to Vulcan).

But the idea that the Vulcan government could order the USS TKumbra, a Starfleet vessel manned by Vulcans, to defy the orders of Starfleet Command, is pretty damn unlikely.

France joined NATO, then over a decade later officially pulled out of NATO, then over four decades after that France officially rejoins NATO.

On March 3, 1918, Russian and the Central Powers signed a treaty that pulled Russia out of the Triple Entente alliance and ended Russia's participation in World War I.

Governments do pull out of alliances, sometimes right in the middle of wars. If (unlikely) Vulcan's government decided to cease sending Vulcan defense forces on deployments to Starfleet, how would that be defying Starfleet Command?

Once Vulcan made the decision, Starfleet would cease being part of the Vulcan ships chain of command. Starfleet would know this, there would be no defiance because there would be no authority.

Every ship we've ever seen answers to Starfleet Command and only Starfleet Command.

Really, what about the Vulcan defense vessels in Unification? TOS frequently (and obviously) had the Enterprise on missions directly for Earth, and not the Federation. But on other occasions it was on missions for the Federation.

I think it's pretty obvious that Starfleet is under the control of the central Federation government

Consider the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon

The UN maritime task force is currently comprised of 2 warships from Bangladesh, and 1 warship each from Brazil, Germany, Greece, Indonesia and Turkey. All these warships remain a part of their home countries navy's, but are currently participating in the UN MTF to which they are attached. If any of the warships were to be recalled by their home country, this would be their countries privilege (some advanced notice would be nice).

While deployed, the tasks force's flagship (the Brazilian frigate Liberal) would identified itself officially as "The Flagship of the United Nations Interim Force," and not officially as a Brazilian naval vessel.

Every Starfleet officer takes an oath to defend the security of the entire Federation ...

Maybe.

... not their home planets.

But it's made clear in dialog that the majority of officers more closely identify with their home world and their particular species, than they do the Federation. The only real exception would be Picard. They're Humans, Vulcans, Betazeds.

Come on, they don't even have a collective name for themselves as being from the Federation.

"Federatistas?"

 

[Nerys Myk]

Feds. Federates. Federals.

 

[section31agent]

Each member planet is represented by an ambassador, which indicates that member planets are independent and sovereign in their own right.

In the animated series, Federation members exchange ambassadors between each other. And in the ST Eleven prequel tie-in comic, the Federation sends ambassadors to it's members (Picard is the Federation ambassador to Vulcan).

But the idea that the Vulcan government could order the USS TKumbra, a Starfleet vessel manned by Vulcans, to defy the orders of Starfleet Command, is pretty damn unlikely.

France joined NATO, then over a decade later officially pulled out of NATO, then over four decades after that France officially rejoins NATO.

On March 3, 1918, Russian and the Central Powers signed a treaty that pulled Russia out of the Triple Entente alliance and ended Russia's participation in World War I.

Governments do pull out of alliances, sometimes right in the middle of wars. If (unlikely) Vulcan's government decided to cease sending Vulcan defense forces on deployments to Starfleet, how would that be defying Starfleet Command?

Once Vulcan made the decision, Starfleet would cease being part of the Vulcan ships chain of command. Starfleet would know this, there would be no defiance because there would be no authority.

Really, what about the Vulcan defense vessels in Unification? TOS frequently (and obviously) had the Enterprise on missions directly for Earth, and not the Federation. But on other occasions it was on missions for the Federation.

Consider the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon

The UN maritime task force is currently comprised of 2 warships from Bangladesh, and 1 warship each from Brazil, Germany, Greece, Indonesia and Turkey. All these warships remain a part of their home countries navy's, but are currently participating in the UN MTF to which they are attached. If any of the warships were to be recalled by their home country, this would be their countries privilege (some advanced notice would be nice).

While deployed, the tasks force's flagship (the Brazilian frigate Liberal) would identified itself officially as "The Flagship of the United Nations Interim Force," and not officially as a Brazilian naval vessel.

Every Starfleet officer takes an oath to defend the security of the entire Federation ...

Maybe.

... not their home planets.

But it's made clear in dialog that the majority of officers more closely identify with their home world and their particular species, than they do the Federation. The only real exception would be Picard. They're Humans, Vulcans, Betazeds.

Come on, they don't even have a collective name for themselves as being from the Federation.

"Federatistas?"

They are just called Federation citizens in many many episodes.

There is no maybe on the oath. Every Starfleet officer, whether human, Vulcan or otherwise takes an oath to defend the security of the Federation as a whole. Picard took this oath, Spock took this oath, everyone takes the same oath. That is why the Vulcan government has no more authority over Spock or the USS T'Kumbra crew than the Andorian or Earth governments. All members vote together on the Federation Council, then the Council as a whole issues orders to Starfleet Command.

In every NATO or UN operation, soldiers in each country agree to a temporary chain of command. But their oath is always to their home country, not to NATO or the UN as a whole. And that is why the Federation is different from NATO and the UN

 

[MacLeod]

The UFP of the 21st century could be different to that of the 23rd of that of the 24th and so on.

Over time it would likely have changed and evolved perhaps from a loose alliance of planets into a closer alliance of planets.

Take the EU for example you might be born in say Germany, which makes you German citizen but at the same time you are also a European citizen.

In terms of the Federation Council do we really know what areas it has been granted control over and which areas still reside with the individual member worlds.

 

[T'Girl]

They are just called Federation citizens in many many episodes

To be accurate the term is used only a few times, but yes it was used. I'm trying to remember someone besides Picard employing it, I would (in all honesty) describe Picard as a Federation "kool-aid drinker."

There is no maybe on the oath. Every Starfleet officer, whether human, Vulcan or otherwise takes an oath to defend the security of the Federation as a whole

Could you recommend a episode where I can see/hear this, so I might respond with knowledge?

UN Peacekeeping troops do take a separate oath as peacekeepers, but I'm not sure of it's exact wording.

And that is why the Federation is different from NATO and the UN

While I feel that there are similarities, I would agree that there are differences. It would be impossible to point to any Earth (present day or historical) organization or institution and say "the Federation is exactly like this." It would be unique and unusual, with likely many alien influences in it's structure.

Take the EU for example you might be born in say Germany, which makes you German citizen but at the same time you are also a European citizen.

I was born in (West) Germany, on Ramstein Air Base, and I am solely a American citizen. The majority of the countries in the Americas have "right of the soil," an unconditional basis for citizenship if you're born here (diplomatic exceptions).

My understanding is that few countries outside of the Americas have this, citizenship for a new born elsewhere comes with at least some conditions.

In terms of the Federation Council do we really know what areas it has been granted control over and which areas still reside with the individual member worlds.

It's all bits and pieces and clues. Cloud Minders established that membership comes with obligations, but also the retention of sovereignty. As I understand it, Roddenberry originally conceived the UFP to be Earth ... with some alien planets too. Dorothy Fontana changed that (Journey to Babel) into a multispecies assemblage of apparently equal players.

To be completely honest, I really don't think that the producers and writers on the shows ever just sat down and thought the whole thing out in detail. They were too busy cranking out episodes week by week. That why if we want to figure it out, we have to assemble "bits and pieces and clues."

In two different episodes the Federation is directly described as a "alliance."

The TNG writers and directors guide directly calls the Federation an "alliance."

The UFP of the 21st century could be different to that of the 23rd of that of the 24th and so on.

The Federation grows from a half dozen members to over one hundred and fifty, change would be unavoidable.

 

[section31agent]

They are just called Federation citizens in many many episodes

To be accurate the term is used only a few times, but yes it was used. I'm trying to remember someone besides Picard employing it, I would (in all honesty) describe Picard as a Federation "kool-aid drinker."

There is no maybe on the oath. Every Starfleet officer, whether human, Vulcan or otherwise takes an oath to defend the security of the Federation as a whole

Could you recommend a episode where I can see/hear this, so I might respond with knowledge?

UN Peacekeeping troops do take a separate oath as peacekeepers, but I'm not sure of it's exact wording.

While I feel that there are similarities, I would agree that there are differences. It would be impossible to point to any Earth (present day or historical) organization or institution and say "the Federation is exactly like this." It would be unique and unusual, with likely many alien influences in it's structure.

I was born in (West) Germany, on Ramstein Air Base, and I am solely a American citizen. The majority of the countries in the Americas have "right of the soil," an unconditional basis for citizenship if you're born here (diplomatic exceptions).

My understanding is that few countries outside of the Americas have this, citizenship for a new born elsewhere comes with at least some conditions.

In terms of the Federation Council do we really know what areas it has been granted control over and which areas still reside with the individual member worlds.

It's all bits and pieces and clues. Cloud Minders established that membership comes with obligations, but also the retention of sovereignty. As I understand it, Roddenberry originally conceived the UFP to be Earth ... with some alien planets too. Dorothy Fontana changed that (Journey to Babel) into a multispecies assemblage of apparently equal players.

To be completely honest, I really don't think that the producers and writers on the shows ever just sat down and thought the whole thing out in detail. They were too busy cranking out episodes week by week. That why if we want to figure it out, we have to assemble "bits and pieces and clues."

In two different episodes the Federation is directly described as a "alliance."

The TNG writers and directors guide directly calls the Federation an "alliance."

The UFP of the 21st century could be different to that of the 23rd of that of the 24th and so on.

The Federation grows from a half dozen members to over one hundred and fifty, change would be unavoidable.

I would say the term Federation citizen has been used more than a few times and definitely not only by Picard. Just off the top of my head...

When Kirk is arrested for the assassination of Klingon Chancellor Gorkon in ST6. Starfleet Command: "We can't allow Federation citizens to be abducted". President: "I agree, but I do not wish to violate international law". Also note that Starfleet Command is subject to the authority of the Federation President only even though he is not human. And there is nothing the local Earth government can do about it

During O'Brien's arrest by Cardassian authorities in Tribunal. Both Miles and Keiko vehemently protest that they are Federation citizens

In Descent, When Picard decides not to send Hugh back to the Borg with a computer virus. Admiral Necheyev to Picard "You're duty is to safeguard the lives of Federation citizens, not wrestle with your conscience". (Notice she said his duty is to protect all Federation citizens, not just Earth citizens or humans only)

As for the oath that Vulcan officers make, in the Enterprise Incident, Spock is arrested for stealing a Romulan cloaking device. He says "Yes I stole the cloaking device. I make no apologies. I am a Starfleet Officer and my duty is to defend the security of the Federation". To which the Romulan says "You state the obvious." So it is obvious, even to the Romulans that Starfleet officers swear an oath to the Federation as a whole.

So those are my examples as you requested. Now if you could provide an example of this UN peacekeeping oath you speak of? I have never heard of this before.

In fact there is a case from the 90s where a US soldier faced a court martial for refusing to wear the blue beret in a UN peacekeeping mission. He felt that wearing the beret meant he was betraying the US and was no longer a US soldier. The Army of course thought that was ridiculous and issued a statement reaffirming that all American soldiers keep their oath of allegiance to the United States and its President no matter what, even while under temporary command of a foreign General in a UN peacekeeping operation. I'm pretty sure every UN soldier understands this whether they are American, Canadian, Pakistani, Filipino, etc. they all maintain their loyalties to their homeland

 

[T'Girl]

UN Peacekeeping troops do take a separate oath as peacekeepers, but I'm not sure of it's exact wording.

So those are my examples as you requested. Now if you could provide an example of this UN peacekeeping oath you speak of? I have never heard of this before.

While I can't find a copy of the oath itself, there are reference to peacekeeper taking a oath (apparently separate from their countries own military oath). There are news reports of peacekeeper having and occasional breaking their oath, as with the French peacekeepers who committed rapes in Africa.

http://globalnation.inquirer.net/111523/new-batch-of-peacekeepers-ships-out-this-time-to-haiti

http://english.cntv.cn/2014/12/22/VIDE1419247564396830.shtmlhttp://www.gettyimages.ca/detail/ne...n-peacekeepers-blue-beret-news-photo/75429660

As for various people being referred to a citizens of the Federation. Citizen (like many English words) has multiple meanings, which is why it's reasonable to refer to someone as being a "citizen of a local community," even when that local community isn't a country in of itself. So you could be referring to a inhabitant, resident or denizen.

Today you will occasional come across the term "global citizen," which is people and organizations identifying with a community larger than just their political state.

There are also people today with dual (or more) citizenship, and while I don't see the Federation as a country, it might be possible that Miles O'Brien is a citizen of Ireland, a citizen of Earth and a citizen of the UFP.

Miles and Keiko claiming Federation citizenship could be them reminding others that they enjoyed not just the protection of their home country or home planet, but because of it's membership, they were protected by the entire Federation.

 

[section31agent]

So those are my examples as you requested. Now if you could provide an example of this UN peacekeeping oath you speak of? I have never heard of this before.

While I can't find a copy of the oath itself, there are reference to peacekeeper taking a oath (apparently separate from their countries own military oath). There are news reports of peacekeeper having and occasional breaking their oath, as with the French peacekeepers who committed rapes in Africa.

http://globalnation.inquirer.net/111523/new-batch-of-peacekeepers-ships-out-this-time-to-haiti

http://english.cntv.cn/2014/12/22/VIDE1419247564396830.shtmlhttp://www.gettyimages.ca/detail/ne...n-peacekeepers-blue-beret-news-photo/75429660

As for various people being referred to a citizens of the Federation. Citizen (like many English words) has multiple meanings, which is why it's reasonable to refer to someone as being a "citizen of a local community," even when that local community isn't a country in of itself. So you could be referring to a inhabitant, resident or denizen.

Today you will occasional come across the term "global citizen," which is people and organizations identifying with a community larger than just their political state.

There are also people today with dual (or more) citizenship, and while I don't see the Federation as a country, it might be possible that Miles O'Brien is a citizen of Ireland, a citizen of Earth and a citizen of the UFP.

Miles and Keiko claiming Federation citizenship could be them reminding others that they enjoyed not just the protection of their home country or home planet, but because of it's membership, they were protected by the entire Federation.

The point of our discussion is which level of government really controls the armed forces as that is usually a good indicator of which level is the sovereign state.

Your argument was why can't the Vulcan government pull out of Federation operations by ordering Spock or the USS TKumbra to disobey Starfleet Command.

I'm saying they can't because all Starfleet officers regardless of which planet they came from take the same oath to defend the security of the entire Federation. Their top commander is the President of the Federation Council whether he is a human, Vulcan or from some other alien world.

As you said we don't know what kind of oath they are taking at the Filipino and Chinese ceremonies. But I am sure it is not an oath of allegiance to the United Nations, its Security Council or Secretary General Ki-Moon. If the Chinese President changes his mind and withdraws his troops over the objections of the Security Council, who do you think the Chinese soldiers will obey? The UN Security Council or their own President? There is no UN soldier anywhere in the world that would take orders from the UN Security Council over the objections of their home government. UN missions are joint operations between different sovereign governments that can withdraw at any time.

Starfleet is not a joint operation between sovereign states despite the fact that its service members come from many different worlds. Starfleet has one chain of command that leads directly up to the President of the Federation Council. The Federation Council itself is the sovereign state.

As for citizenship, yes I know there are different terms for that but you asked who used the term Federation citizen besides Captain Picard so I gave you examples. But the point I've been really trying to make is that, UN soldiers, NATO soldiers, their loyalties remain pledged to their home countries. Starfleet officers pledge their loyalty to the Federation as a whole.

 

[aridas sofia]

While I can't find a copy of the oath itself, there are reference to peacekeeper taking a oath (apparently separate from their countries own military oath). There are news reports of peacekeeper having and occasional breaking their oath, as with the French peacekeepers who committed rapes in Africa.

http://globalnation.inquirer.net/111523/new-batch-of-peacekeepers-ships-out-this-time-to-haiti

http://english.cntv.cn/2014/12/22/VIDE1419247564396830.shtmlhttp://www.gettyimages.ca/detail/ne...n-peacekeepers-blue-beret-news-photo/75429660

As for various people being referred to a citizens of the Federation. Citizen (like many English words) has multiple meanings, which is why it's reasonable to refer to someone as being a "citizen of a local community," even when that local community isn't a country in of itself. So you could be referring to a inhabitant, resident or denizen.

Today you will occasional come across the term "global citizen," which is people and organizations identifying with a community larger than just their political state.

There are also people today with dual (or more) citizenship, and while I don't see the Federation as a country, it might be possible that Miles O'Brien is a citizen of Ireland, a citizen of Earth and a citizen of the UFP.

Miles and Keiko claiming Federation citizenship could be them reminding others that they enjoyed not just the protection of their home country or home planet, but because of it's membership, they were protected by the entire Federation.

The point of our discussion is which level of government really controls the armed forces as that is usually a good indicator of which level is the sovereign state.

Your argument was why can't the Vulcan government pull out of Federation operations by ordering Spock or the USS TKumbra to disobey Starfleet Command.

I'm saying they can't because all Starfleet officers regardless of which planet they came from take the same oath to defend the security of the entire Federation. Their top commander is the President of the Federation Council whether he is a human, Vulcan or from some other alien world.

As you said we don't know what kind of oath they are taking at the Filipino and Chinese ceremonies. But I am sure it is not an oath of allegiance to the United Nations, its Security Council or Secretary General Ki-Moon. If the Chinese President changes his mind and withdraws his troops over the objections of the Security Council, who do you think the Chinese soldiers will obey? The UN Security Council or their own President? There is no UN soldier anywhere in the world that would take orders from the UN Security Council over the objections of their home government. UN missions are joint operations between different sovereign governments that can withdraw at any time.

Starfleet is not a joint operation between sovereign states despite the fact that its service members come from many different worlds. Starfleet has one chain of command that leads directly up to the President of the Federation Council. The Federation Council itself is the sovereign state.

As for citizenship, yes I know there are different terms for that but you asked who used the term Federation citizen besides Captain Picard so I gave you examples. But the point I've been really trying to make is that, UN soldiers, NATO soldiers, their loyalties remain pledged to their home countries. Starfleet officers pledge their loyalty to the Federation as a whole.

There really is no indication this is the case in the TOS timeframe. And in fact if one were to piece together the TOS-only evidence, there is a pretty strong indication that Enterprise is an Earth (UESPA) ship reporting to Earth bases that has the unusual distinction of having an alien officer aboard, who enjoys the distinction of (figurative) kinship with his commanding officer because of the relatively recent events of Axanar. That seems to say Starfleet IS in fact like say, NATO but that after Axanar there is a strong move for integration, the strengthening of the Federation, and even the eventual subsuming of sovereignties within one larger sovereign entity.

 

[Nerys Myk]

IIRC, UESPA and "Earth ship" were abandoned by the end of Season One.

 

[T'Girl]

^At the end of the second season of TOS, when a alien asks from what planet their space vessel is from, Kirk says Earth. Kirk doesn't say "the United Federation of Planets."

In Encounter at Farpoint, Q tells the Enterprise crew to go back where they came from, Picard tells the crew that Q wants them to return to Earth, Picard doesn't say return to the Federation.

 

[C57D]

IIRC, UESPA and "Earth ship" were abandoned by the end of Season One.

Although I have long been a fan of the original Spaceflight Chronology, the more I think about the onscreen evidence (helped by the thread), the more I think it may not be right.

Balance of Terror stated that the war had been 100 years ago against Earth (not the Feds!) and the Roms.

Journey to Babel seemed to say that Babel was an newly assigned planetoid for that meeting (over what seems like a major dispute) between Fed members, which suggests that there was not a Fed Council which routinely met at a routine location to discuss these sorts of issues?
And they were ambassadors not council members, which suggests there were no such things?

In Court Martial Kirk mentions the "Vulcanian mission" which sounds like a very unique mission? If there was a coherent Fed, would a visit to/mission working with another founding world be such a big deal?

And all the season 1 UESPA quotes, already mentioned, of course.

It all starts to sound to me that the UFP is a loose alliance of several interstellar governments with their own colonies and space, of which Earth/Terra is one. Lesser planets in the space of one of these governments simply join, or don't as maybe.

But the original governments (Terra, Vulcan, Andor and Tellar) form and run the federation.

So, what we see in TOS is actually (mostly) the Human part of the Fed, with Spock as the "exchange officer" from Vulcan?

And could Axanar have been the catalyst for a deeping of relationship between Vulcan and Earth? Maybe Earth forces, led by Garth, defend Vulcan interests against a third party?

In which case, everything looks different!

 

[Nerys Myk]

^At the end of the second season of TOS, when a alien asks from what planet their space vessel is from, Kirk says Earth. Kirk doesn't say "the United Federation of Planets."

In Encounter at Farpoint, Q tells the Enterprise crew to go back where they came from, Picard tells the crew that Q wants them to return to Earth, Picard doesn't say return to the Federation.

Well the UFP isn't a planet, so Kirk answered the question as asked. And Gary Seven isn't an alien.

The whole "go back to Earth" thing in Encounter At Farpoint never made sense. The idea the UFP was made of up of multiple species on many planets was already well established. Were they going to drop off Worf on Qo'noS and Deanna on Beta Zed on the way back?

But yes, the writers at times fell back on the human/Earth thing after establishing the interplanetary nature of the UFP and Starfleet.

 

[T'Girl]

UN missions are joint operations between different sovereign governments that can withdraw at any time.

And I think this would be the case with the Federation.

Your argument was why can't the Vulcan government pull out of Federation operations by ordering Spock or the USS TKumbra to disobey Starfleet Command.

It was never my position that Vulcan could recall Spock (although I did say they could recall the T'kumbra), due to his dual ancestry he might not be in Vulcan's fleet, but instead Earth's.

Well the UFP isn't a planet, so Kirk answered the question as asked.

But if the Enterprise were a Federation ship, why would Kirk say that it was from Earth? Unless it was a Earth ship.

And Gary Seven isn't an alien.

No he wasn't (but he was an alien agent).

The idea the UFP was made of up of multiple species on many planets was already well established.

No one is disputing this.

Were they going to drop off Worf on Qo'noS and Deanna on Beta Zed on the way back?

Seems doubtful.

But yes, the writers at times fell back on the human/Earth thing after establishing the interplanetary nature of the UFP and Starfleet.

This is from the ST: TNG writer/director's guide (page 35).

THE FEDERATION IS AN ALLIANCE OF MANY PLANETS

The Federation is not a human-only alliance. Many worlds, human and otherwise, have joined together to form a Federation of mutual benefits and services.

The guide/bible (as I understand it) was written by David Gerrold, based on ideas from himself, Roddenberry and Fontana. This is what various writers and directors would have gone off, so it wouldn't be a case of "falling back" on the human/Earth thing. The Federation is some kind of alliance.

 

[telerites]

I assume since the Enterprise was built at Earth (starbase? Orbiting Earth), literally it is from there and would consider Earth its home base.

 

[Nerys Myk]

But if the Enterprise were a Federation ship, why would Kirk say that it was from Earth? Unless it was a Earth ship.

Sloppy writing

The idea the UFP was made of up of multiple species on many planets was already well established.

No one is disputing this.

Just pointing out the inconsistency.

Were they going to drop off Worf on Qo'noS and Deanna on Beta Zed on the way back?

Seems doubtful.

A joke.

But yes, the writers at times fell back on the human/Earth thing after establishing the interplanetary nature of the UFP and Starfleet.

This is from the ST: TNG writer/director's guide (page 35).

THE FEDERATION IS AN ALLIANCE OF MANY PLANETS

The Federation is not a human-only alliance. Many worlds, human and otherwise, have joined together to form a Federation of mutual benefits and services.

The guide/bible (as I understand it) was written by David Gerrold, based on ideas from himself, Roddenberry and Fontana. This is what various writers and directors would have gone off, so it wouldn't be a case of "falling back" on the human/Earth thing. The Federation is some kind of alliance.

Yes it is and the Enterprise(s) is a ship that serves that alliance. So Q rambling on about humans and threatening to send them to their "room" is poorly conceived and at odds with the writer's guide.

 

[velour]

Your argument was why can't the Vulcan government pull out of Federation operations by ordering Spock or the USS TKumbra to disobey Starfleet Command.

Why would the Vulcan government have authority (in terms of having the power to order Spock around) over Spock? I thought Spock voluntarily enlisted himself into Starfleet. He was a private Vulcan citizen who joined Starfleet.

Spock didn't have a dual obligation to Starfleet and some Vulcan governmental entity. He was a member only of Starfleet. Unless Vulcan had some law that empowered the Vulcan government to order its citizens around, I don't see how a Vulcan government can order Spock to leave Starfleet.

 

[T'Girl]

I assume since the Enterprise was built at Earth (starbase? Orbiting Earth), literally it is from there and would consider Earth its home base.

If the captain of the NAe São Paulo (a aircraft carrier) were asked what country his ship was from, he would say Brazil, even through the ship was constructed at a shipyard in Saint-Nazaire, France.

If the Enterprise were a Federation ship (and not a Earth ship), regardless of where it was built, why would Kirk refer to as being from the planet Earth?

During TOS and the episode Assignment Earth, the Enterprise by appearances was very much not home based at Earth