TSFS - Let's assume Kirk was thinking clearly

[Timo]

It does seem clear that Kirk murdered Kruge's boarding party without any remorse or "sporting chance" or other such nonsense. And why he chose to perform this necessary action via self-destruct rather than via beaming-into-oblivion seems clear to me as well...

The ship was going to be lost in any case: killing the boarding party would prompt Kruge to fire on the unprotected Starfleet ship and easily and completely destroy it. So our heroes had to get out of the doomed vessel in any case; the self-destruct ruse allowed for that, but staying behind and fine-tuning a transporter to accomplish the killings would not have.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Xhiandra]

why did Scotty not just lock onto the entire BOP crew and beam them into the middle of a volcanic eruption on Genesis or easier - space?

Does that sound like the Starfleet way to solve a problem?

Because setting a bomb for them to walk into and a hand to hand grudge match before you throw them into said volcano is so much more ethical and sporting.

Yes, it is? Letting people die vs outright murder.
The Klingons would've lived had they not deliberately boarded the Enterprise.
The volcano drop was self-defense, Kruge was trying to take him down with him, IIRC.

 

[R. Star]

Does that sound like the Starfleet way to solve a problem?

Because setting a bomb for them to walk into and a hand to hand grudge match before you throw them into said volcano is so much more ethical and sporting.

Yes, it is? Letting people die vs outright murder.
The Klingons would've lived had they not deliberately boarded the Enterprise.
The volcano drop was self-defense, Kruge was trying to take him down with him, IIRC.

So setting a bomb deliberately to explode in a place you know someone it going to walk into isn't murder. Our legal system today doesn't agree.

It was a combat situation and one method of killing the enemy isn't that much different than the other.

 

[Timo]

...Also, a bit of extra cruelty or humiliation would be a smart move in Kirk's part, as he probably well knows that the surviving Klingons would get enraged by it to the point of irrationality, and thus become less of a threat.

In TOS, Kirk met plenty of cool and calculating Klingons, and definitely wouldn't want to be facing one of those. Kruge is Kor freed of the constraints of civility, a ruthless blackmailer and slayer-for-tactical-profit. Kruge enraged is just your regular barbarian.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[MacLeod]

I mean they opened fire upon a BOP as soon as it de-cloaked without actually waiting to see whether they armed their weapons or tried to establish contact.

I swear, do some people actually watch the movies...

SULU: Klingon Bird of Prey, sir! She's arming torpedoes!

That line was given as the ship decloaked.

What exactly would be Kirk's reason to wait and communicate with the Klingons? They are unable to contact the Grissom and the Bird-of-Prey is arming weapons as she's decloaking.

As you say, you can't contact or detect the Grissom. You believe you have detected a Klingon BoP. Which if the Klingon Neutral Zone is anything like the Romulan means it has commited at least one act of war, two if you count the likelyhood it destroyed the Grissom.

 

[BillJ]

I mean they opened fire upon a BOP as soon as it de-cloaked without actually waiting to see whether they armed their weapons or tried to establish contact.

I swear, do some people actually watch the movies...

SULU: Klingon Bird of Prey, sir! She's arming torpedoes!

That line was given as the ship decloaked.

What exactly would be Kirk's reason to wait and communicate with the Klingons? They are unable to contact the Grissom and the Bird-of-Prey is arming weapons as she's decloaking.

As you say, you can't contact or detect the Grissom. You believe you have detected a Klingon BoP. Which if the Klingon Neutral Zone is anything like the Romulan means it has commited at least one act of war, two if you count the likelyhood it destroyed the Grissom.

The moment you raise shields, Kruge knows he has been spotted and it becomes a completely different game. Kirk knows in prolonged combat he will be at a disadvantage, he's got three people running a ship crewed normally by 430.

Kirk feels getting the first shot off is to his advantage.

 

[CoveTom]

The moment you raise shields, Kruge knows he has been spotted and it becomes a completely different game. Kirk knows in prolonged combat he will be at a disadvantage, he's got three people running a ship crewed normally by 430.

Four. Five if you count McCoy/Spock twice.

 

[Timo]

What Kirk knows and doesn't know about his opponent is curious in itself. Clearly, Kirk is familiar with the concept of invisible Klingon ships, and readily equates this with the specific "Bird of Prey" type. Is this because he knows that the cloak-capable Klingon ships are all Birds of Prey, or because he knows how Klingon cloaks behave in general and was previously told that Chekov was getting a reading of a scout-category vessel?

Kirk never explicitly met cloaked Klingon adversaries in TOS (although the case could be made that his opponent in the teaser of "Errand of Mercy" struck from under a cloak, and that the blurry view of a Klingon scout in "Friday's Child" was due to stealth technology rather than extreme distance). His and Sulu's familiarity with the Klingon Bird of Prey thus might suggest further adventures, even though Kirk seems to have been desk-bound for a long time as the ST2/3/4 arc begins. Is Kirk's knowledge indirect, based on recent reports only? Or outdated, and taking into account his personal experience that Klingons generally don't change their habits or technology much?

A lot would seem to depend on Kirk correctly guessing the size of his opponent. Although perhaps not: the vulnerability of a cloaked opponent at the moment of decloaking might be the same, be it a scout or a battle cruiser. And after the initial exchange of fire, Kruge's vessel is in plain sight and its crew size can be guessed at.

The battle is an interesting example of experience vs. technology in any case. Kirk lacks his usual tactical sensors, due both to damage and understaffing; he still more or correctly guesses what his opponent is capable of. Kruge in turn is in the dark, failing to understand that Kirk lacks some 400 crew and all armament and shielding, despite in theory possessing working sensors and a full crew. Kirk should probably be commended for not stretching his luck: beaming over to the Klingon ship rather than the planet would have been foolhardy at best, especially with half his team being geriatrically challenged to put it mildly...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[BillJ]

It was a combat situation and one method of killing the enemy isn't that much different than the other.

By beaming them into a volcano, you are summarily executing Kruge's boarding party. By allowing them to board the ship, you're still giving them a fighting but slim chance to survive or to be pulled back by Kruge at the last minute.

I see a world of difference in the two actions...

 

[starburst]

Bold plan really though as there was no guarantee they would be able to get off Genesis.

 

[Timo]

By beaming them into a volcano, you are summarily executing Kruge's boarding party. By allowing them to board the ship, you're still giving them a fighting but slim chance to survive or to be pulled back by Kruge at the last minute.

I see a world of difference in the two actions...

But apparently Kirk doesn't. After all, he wanted the Klingons dead. He shot one dead when he could have used stun.

...And if you put that down to anger, then he'd certainly be more angry when executing the boarding party than after having survived the party's assault and reached the surface of the planet.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[BillJ]

But apparently Kirk doesn't. After all, he wanted the Klingons dead. He shot one dead when he could have used stun.

This makes no sense. You obviously missed the part where he tried to save Kruge and where he spared Maltz.

 

[BillJ]

...And if you put that down to anger, then he'd certainly be more angry when executing the boarding party than after having survived the party's assault and reached the surface of the planet.

Timo Saloniemi

Yes, he'd obviously be less angry after seeing his sons broken body with a giant knife wound on the surface of the planet.

He'd be less angry after seeing how his son was brutalized...

 

[Timo]

This makes no sense. You obviously missed the part where he tried to save Kruge and where he spared Maltz.

Sparing Maltz was a luxury he could finally afford. Saving Kruge is a good move if he wants to get out of the planet alive. But Kirk being merciful by default? We see no signs of that.

Yes, he'd obviously be less angry after seeing his sons broken body with a giant knife wound on the surface of the planet.

As opposed to him being less angry right after hearing his son die?

Kirk wanted dead Klingons. Kirk got dead Klingons. And that is Kirk for you - the fifty-something fella whose family motto is "Let them die!", rather than the thirty-something guy who sets phasers on stun when Starfleet declares war.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[BillJ]

Kirk wanted dead Klingons. Kirk got dead Klingons. And that is Kirk for you - the fifty-something fella whose family motto is "Let them die!", rather than the thirty-something guy who sets phasers on stun when Starfleet declares war.

Timo Saloniemi

I still think you're trying way too hard to paint Kirk's actions in an unfavorable light...

KIRK: Good shooting, Mister Scott. ...Precautionary, Mister Chekov. Shields up.

If Kirk simply wanted dead Klingons, he'd have prepared to fire a second shot while Kruge's ship was trying to recover instead of ordering shields as a precautionary measure. For all he knew, the inability to contact Grissom meant David could already be dead. Remember, Kirk said Klingons don't take prisoners.

At no point did Kirk seem to be making decisions out of malice. He was defending his ship and Starfleet technology from an invader who had already destroyed one ship and executed a Federation citizen. Tactically, there wasn't a lot of options at Kirk's disposal. Even if he could successfully defend the Enterprise from the Klingon force, he's still sitting in a dead hulk with Kruge across from him with fully functioning weapons.

He gave Kruge time to reconsider his actions, Kruge sent his men over anyway and paid the price.

 

[Timo]

If Kirk simply wanted dead Klingons

...He'd get them. He's good at it.

But he'd only have the motivation after he had chatted with Kruge and gotten his son killed as the result. So what he did at the situation you described would not be relevant.

Remember, Kirk said Klingons don't take prisoners.

Followed by a wink of his eye. After all, he had been prisoner to Klingons!

Up until the exchange with Kruge, Kirk probably thought Klingons were among his nicer foes. After that, he had real trouble with the concept of a likeable Klingon, as in choking in his lobster when Gorkon didn't speak in threats.

Even if he could successfully defend the Enterprise from the Klingon force, he's still sitting in a dead hulk with Kruge across from him with fully functioning weapons.

Which is a logical reason for him blowing up the ship rather than trying the other things suggested here, such as beaming Kruge's crew to the sun or trying to take over the Klingon vessel. And which does not translate to Kirk showing mercy or sportsmanship. He's not an idiot.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[MacLeod]

To draw an analaogy

So If I'm a captain of a ship and decide to scuttle it to prevent it falling into enemy hands and then adandon ship, and enemy troops board it and fail to get off before it sinks. It's murder?

The self destruct is akin to scuttling a ship.

 

[sonak]

To draw an analaogy

So If I'm a captain of a ship and decide to scuttle it to prevent it falling into enemy hands and then adandon ship, and enemy troops board it and fail to get off before it sinks. It's murder?

The self destruct is akin to scuttling a ship.

er, Kirk surrendered and deliberately didn't tell Kruge of his plan to self-destruct the ship. He knew Klingons were coming to board the ship and set a trap for them. That's a bit different than your scenario above.

At any rate, it still wasn't "murder." It was self-defense against the clear aggressors during a combat situation.

 

[Ian Keldon]

So setting a bomb deliberately to explode in a place you know someone it going to walk into isn't murder. Our legal system today doesn't agree.

It was a combat situation and one method of killing the enemy isn't that much different than the other.

And in a combat situation, a soldier killing isn't committing murder.

 

[Ian Keldon]

It was a combat situation and one method of killing the enemy isn't that much different than the other.

By beaming them into a volcano, you are summarily executing Kruge's boarding party. By allowing them to board the ship, you're still giving them a fighting but slim chance to survive or to be pulled back by Kruge at the last minute.

I see a world of difference in the two actions...

There is no moral obligation in a modern combat zone for the soldiers of one side to "give a fighting chance" to the other. Their obligation is to first their nation/faction/side, and then to their own lives/those of their own comrades.