The Typhon Pact

[Cicero]

Isn'tthe Federation of Star Trek supposted to be ABOVE that sort of stuff though, also the Typhon Pact HASN'T done any official hostile action against the Feds so doing that makes them look like total tools who only care about remaining on top.

Rome fell, but first it stood for a thousand years. Regardless of its eventual fate, its policies were highly successful at securing stability and safety for Rome itself for hundreds of years. Rome was predominate for a greater time than that in which most nations even exist.

I wasn't suggesting that the Federation emulate it, though. My point was to Christopher's assertion that the application of Force is a policy that will necessarily fail. I agree that it will fail if it is the only policy applied (except when used for annihilation), but do think it can be quite successful if combined with the right element of peaceful cooperation and integration - the arrows and olive branchs of the US seal, if you will. Remember that in World War II, we applied to force to (essentially) two countries, achieved a military victory, and then sustained that victory in peace by offering policies which treated the defeated nations well and brought areas ruined by war back to prosperity (e.g. the Marshall Plan).

Even the United States was very successful in the use of force - and, at times, in manipulation - in conquering North America (and in opening Japan to the outside world, ending the Russo-Japanese war, etc.).

You've just listed policies the U.S. undertook in the past that it absolutely should not have undertaken -- immoral, imperial policies that never benefitted us half as much as policies like the Marshall Plan, policies built on mutual cooperation and partnership.

I disagree that our early imperial policies benefited us less than the Marshall Plan and other policies of cooperation. I doubt we would be nearly so prosperous today had the bulk of the North American continent not been united and industrialized so quickly - nevermind the initial imperialism integral to our establishment. Whether those policies were moral, is, of course, a separate question. (And one which I'd rather defer.)

Also, US intervention in the Russo-Japanese War earned President Roosevelt the Nobel Peace Prize.

So your saying the Federation should declare war on the Pact which hasn't done anything to warent it and they wouldn't look like selfinterested dicks who only care about being top dog?

No, as I said above, I would not like to see the Federation do that. My point is to the effectiveness of tactics, not their morality. Above all, the Federation should be moral - else its not an optimistic future.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

Rome fell, but first it stood for a thousand years. Regardless of its eventual fate, its policies were highly successful at securing stability and safety for Rome itself for hundreds of years. Rome was predominate for a greater time than that in which most nations even exist.

I wasn't suggesting that the Federation emulate it, though. My point was to Christopher's assertion that the application of Force is a policy that will necessarily fail. I agree that it will fail if it is the only policy applied (except when used for annihilation), but do think it can be quite successful if combined with the right element of peaceful cooperation and integration - the arrows and olive branchs of the US seal, if you will. Remember that in World War II, we applied to force to (essentially) two countries, achieved a military victory, and then sustained that victory in peace by offering policies which treated the defeated nations well and brought areas ruined by war back to prosperity (e.g. the Marshall Plan).

You've just listed policies the U.S. undertook in the past that it absolutely should not have undertaken -- immoral, imperial policies that never benefitted us half as much as policies like the Marshall Plan, policies built on mutual cooperation and partnership.

I disagree that our early imperial policies benefited us less than the Marshall Plan and other policies of cooperation. I doubt we would be nearly so prosperous today had the bulk of the North American continent not been united and industrialized so quickly - nevermind the initial imperialism integral to our establishment. Whether those policies were moral, is, of course, a separate question. (And one which I'd rather defer.)

Also, US intervention in the Russo-Japanese War earned President Roosevelt the Nobel Peace Prize.

So your saying the Federation should declare war on the Pact which hasn't done anything to warent it and they wouldn't look like selfinterested dicks who only care about being top dog?

No, as I said above, I would not like to see the Federation do that. My point is to the effectiveness of tactics, not their morality. Above all, the Federation should be moral - else its not an optimistic future.

Oh, okay then sorry for the miss understanding.

 

[Cicero]

^ No worries.

 

[Rush Limborg]

I would think a good rule of thumb, as far as UFP foreign policy is concerned, would be:

No nation may initiate the use of force against another. When defending itself (and its allies) against aggressors, the Federation is perfectly justified in using force (as in the Dominion War), but only then.

Seems simple enough...in theory, of course.

In other words, if war ever breaks out between The Khitomer Alliance and The Typhon Pact, The UFP must take great pains to ensure that the Alliance does not start the war.

However...should war break out, common sense demands that the Alliance must be prepared to fight. Survival depends on it.

 

[rahullak]

^
Question is: Should that fight be limited to ship-to-ship combat? And should it only be defensive? During the Dominion War it was necessary to go on the offensive to end it quickly. Should direct battle be the only means of ensuring a quick end to war? More subtle and covert attempts (such as helping Cardassian dissidents against the Dominion) can be successful in ending conflict and bringing all sides to the negotiating table.

 

[JB2005]

^ And in the mean-time while the Dominion are laying Seige to the entire Federation?

 

[Rush Limborg]

More subtle and covert attempts (such as helping Cardassian dissidents against the Dominion) can be successful in ending conflict and bringing all sides to the negotiating table.

Of course.

But the war must be for the purpose of defense. Once an aggressor attacks, a nation must be willing to do (as the Constitution says) all that is Neccessary And Proper in order to defeat this enemy--through negotiation where possible, through military and covert action where neccessary.

And believe me...it often is neccessary.

 

[rahullak]

 

[Rush Limborg]

^Thank you! And to you to, mate!

(Hey...I could get used to this "Fleet Captain" thing....)

 

[Hartzilla2007]

(Hey...I could get used to this "Fleet Captain" thing....)

You like doing all the paperwork and other crap us Commodore's don't want to do. Or are you talking about either going insane or being horribly disfigured

 

[JD]

^
Question is: Should that fight be limited to ship-to-ship combat? And should it only be defensive? During the Dominion War it was necessary to go on the offensive to end it quickly. Should direct battle be the only means of ensuring a quick end to war? More subtle and covert attempts (such as helping Cardassian dissidents against the Dominion) can be successful in ending conflict and bringing all sides to the negotiating table.

I think the answer to most of those question would entirely depend on the direction of the war, and the actions of the Typhon Pact.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

^
Question is: Should that fight be limited to ship-to-ship combat? And should it only be defensive? During the Dominion War it was necessary to go on the offensive to end it quickly. Should direct battle be the only means of ensuring a quick end to war? More subtle and covert attempts (such as helping Cardassian dissidents against the Dominion) can be successful in ending conflict and bringing all sides to the negotiating table.

I think the answer to most of those question would entirely depend on the direction of the war, and the actions of the Typhon Pact.

And if any conflict with the Pact evolves beyond the Cold War stage.

 

[rahullak]

^
True. True.

 

[Rush Limborg]

You like doing all the paperwork and other crap us Commodore's don't want to do. Or are you talking about either going insane or being horribly disfigured

Both...and neither!

 

[Rush Limborg]

^
Question is: Should that fight be limited to ship-to-ship combat? And should it only be defensive? During the Dominion War it was necessary to go on the offensive to end it quickly. Should direct battle be the only means of ensuring a quick end to war? More subtle and covert attempts (such as helping Cardassian dissidents against the Dominion) can be successful in ending conflict and bringing all sides to the negotiating table.

I think the answer to most of those question would entirely depend on the direction of the war, and the actions of the Typhon Pact.

And if any conflict with the Pact evolves beyond the Cold War stage.

Agreed. As I've stated, I'm thinking the Pact will be trying to test the nerve of the Alliance via "torpedo drills", non-violent dogfighting (think the first scene of Top Gun), and diplomatic bullying--and perhaps, every once in a while, the starting of some border wars, a la Korea and Vietnam....

(Gee, hope I'm not taking the Cold War analogy too seriously again....)

 

[JD]

^
Question is: Should that fight be limited to ship-to-ship combat? And should it only be defensive? During the Dominion War it was necessary to go on the offensive to end it quickly. Should direct battle be the only means of ensuring a quick end to war? More subtle and covert attempts (such as helping Cardassian dissidents against the Dominion) can be successful in ending conflict and bringing all sides to the negotiating table.

I think the answer to most of those question would entirely depend on the direction of the war, and the actions of the Typhon Pact.

And if any conflict with the Pact evolves beyond the Cold War stage.

I was simply responding to rahullak, I really don't think there will be a war. My thinking is that there might be a few little fights, but probably nothing even close to an actual war.

 

[rahullak]

^
For what it's worth, I don't think there will be a war either. But its stimulating to consider other possibilities. It is fictional exploration after all.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

^
For what it's worth, I don't think there will be a war either. But its stimulating to consider other possibilities. It is fictional exploration after all.

Personally I'm hoping for something like A Singular Destiny only on a way larger scale.

 

[Rush Limborg]

Speaking of the Typhon Pact, and how unsure everyone is over whether it's "bad" or not....

It would be interesting if Nan Bacco would use something similar to the following as a campaign ad for a second term--with her face replacing Reagan's at the end, of course:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpwdcmjBgNA&feature=related

Just sayin'....

 

[David cgc]

If Bacco was going to go the paranoid, fear-culling warmonger route, I think she has enough piss and vinegar in her to cut to the chase and just flood the Typhon powers with Genesis bombs, trilithium devices, planetbuster charges, and thus generally nuke and pave that whole half of the quadrant. If she was going to.

I really have such a lack of patience for those who have rhetoric painting a picture of an existential threat, but whose actions show they believe it to be anything but.