Re: Typhon Pact: Zero Sum Game Review thread
Everything is pointing to what SI and by extension Section 31 are doing is necessary and right. People here are defending the mission. The biggest complaint seems to be Sarina is pulling one over on Bashier on behalf of Section 31. When Section 31 is played as the good guys, something is wrong.
I think the presumption that
any mission Section 31 undertakes must automatically be immoral is highly irrational. Mind you, I think Section 31 has no right to exist on any level, but that doesn't mean that anything Section 31 does is automatically evil. That's
Reductio ad Hitlerum, a logical fallacy. You might as well say, "Hitler was a vegetarian. Anything Hitler did was wrong. Therefore, vegetarianism is wrong!"
How much does Bacco know?
Well, if you actually read the novel, you'll recall that she ordered the infiltration of the Breen base and destruction of their prototype and all of its associated data, and that she thereafter authorized the specific mission, was kept apprised of mission progress, and was basically in charge of the whole thing from beginning to end.
And, no, there's no evidence that Section 31 was behind anything other than taking advantage of the opportunity this mission provided to plant Douglas in Bashir's life in order to start manipulating him. There is no evidence at all that Section 31 planned, ordered, or otherwise controlled the operation. More than likely, Douglas is just an S.I. operative who also works for Section 31 but keeps that a secret from S.I. (as that seems to be their standard operating procedure for field agents).
Is she just as dirty as her predecessor?
Her predecessor illegally installed weapons on an independent world in violation of treaty, covered up his actions resulting in the deaths of thousands of allied Klingon personnel, ordered an occupation of that world which led to the deaths of thousands of Federation citizens, and attempted to falsify evidence of the cannons' origins.
Nanietta Bacco, by comparison, is guilty of ordering a retaliatory act of espionage and sabotage against a hostile foreign power that was threatening Federation security, and can, at best, be held responsible for the deaths of a few hundred civilians who were working on a project that directly threatened Federation security.
No, Nanietta Bacco is not "just as dirty" as Min Zife.
What's her first worry? How to "spin" the attack to the media. Let's keep the populace in the dark.
Is that a bad thing? Not all secrets are attempts to manipulate or control the populace or to subvert democracy, whatever Julian Assange might have you think.
ETA:
How much does Bacco know? Is she just as dirty as her predecessor? What's her first worry? How to "spin" the attack to the media. Let's keep the populace in the dark. What's a little lie amongst friends?
I didn't understand that decision. Why would she lie to the public to conceal the Typhon Pact's attack? If your enemy knows your secret, why keep it from your people?
The most obvious reasons I can think of are:
1. To avoid the necessity of going to war, as might well become a political necessity if the populace is sufficiently outraged that enemy agents infiltrated and destroyed a shipyard in Mars orbit (which is, let's recall, the equivalent of someone managing to destroy the
Norfolk Naval Base -- a huge frickin' deal that could incite public panic).
2. To avoid word of the stolen data from getting around to third party political actors not currently aligned with the Typhon Pact, but who may act to gain the same data from the Pact if they discovered the slipstream designs were stolen;
3. To give the Federation plausible deniability in order to launch the retaliatory operation that
Zero Sum Game depicts. If the Federation never officially lost any secrets, then there's no indication that the destruction of the Breen shipyard three months later was in response to anything.
