Just for the record, There are no scenes with Bacco in Gods of Night. So subtract that number by one.
Typhon Pact: Political Analysis
- Thread starter PrimeDirective
- Start date
Just for the record, There are no scenes with Bacco in Gods of Night. So subtract that number by one.
There by starting a war with the Klingons were millions, possibly billions are killed and possibly half of the Typhon Pact (Tholians, Kinshaya, and Tzenkethi) getting to laugh their asses off at the situation as the Federation and Klingons are now effectively crippled and their survival depending on if the Pact sees them as enemies to be crushed or not, which largely depends on how much sway the Federation friendly voices or the Federation is our enemy voices have.
And some people think the post Destiny stuff was unrelentingly dark before.
kkozoriz1
Fleet Captain
Does a Federation deserve to survive if it's based on lies and deceit? When the photos of Abr Grahib were released did they attempt to cover it up? Or did the media do their duty and report on the news?
It's a fact that the Federation armed the Tezwa with illegal weapons under the Khitomer Accords. It's also a fact that Starfleet officers removed a democratically elected official from office. Starfleet was also involved, in the person of Admiral Ross, in President Zife's murder. For all of this, Admiral Ross was made to resign. No further action was undertaken. Everyone involved simply swept it under the rug and hoped that nobody would ever look there.
Should Iran/Contra have not been exposed? Should the government and the press have worked together to cover up the illegal sale of arms to a hostile power?
If you discover wrong doing, you expose it, press charges, have a trial, render a verdict and pass sentence. That's what democracies do. They don't break treaties, cover it up, allow the military to decide the fitness of the civilian government to govern and assist in the assassination of a government official.
If the Federation had caught the Klingons doing something similar, would they declare that all Klingons had been involved and go to war?
A treaty is based on trust and the Federation has proven that they cannot be trusted to uphold their own laws.
Bacco is part of the coverup and is guilty of being an accessory after the fact.
It's a fact that the Federation armed the Tezwa with illegal weapons under the Khitomer Accords. It's also a fact that Starfleet officers removed a democratically elected official from office. Starfleet was also involved, in the person of Admiral Ross, in President Zife's murder. For all of this, Admiral Ross was made to resign. No further action was undertaken. Everyone involved simply swept it under the rug and hoped that nobody would ever look there.
Should Iran/Contra have not been exposed? Should the government and the press have worked together to cover up the illegal sale of arms to a hostile power?
If you discover wrong doing, you expose it, press charges, have a trial, render a verdict and pass sentence. That's what democracies do. They don't break treaties, cover it up, allow the military to decide the fitness of the civilian government to govern and assist in the assassination of a government official.
If the Federation had caught the Klingons doing something similar, would they declare that all Klingons had been involved and go to war?
A treaty is based on trust and the Federation has proven that they cannot be trusted to uphold their own laws.
Bacco is part of the coverup and is guilty of being an accessory after the fact.
kkozoriz1
Fleet Captain
Does a Federation deserve to survive if it's based on lies and deceit? When the photos of Abr Grahib were released did they attempt to cover it up? Or did the media do their duty and report on the news?
It's a fact that the Federation armed the Tezwa with illegal weapons under the Khitomer Accords. It's also a fact that Starfleet officers removed a democratically elected official from office. Starfleet was also involved, in the person of Admiral Ross, in President Zife's murder. For all of this, Admiral Ross was made to resign. No further action was undertaken. Everyone involved simply swept it under the rug and hoped that nobody would ever look there.
Should Iran/Contra have not been exposed? Should the government and the press have worked together to cover up the illegal sale of arms to a hostile power?
If you discover wrong doing, you expose it, press charges, have a trial, render a verdict and pass sentence. That's what democracies do. They don't break treaties, cover it up, allow the military to decide the fitness of the civilian government to govern and assist in the assassination of a government official.
If the Federation had caught the Klingons doing something similar, would they declare that all Klingons had been involved and go to war?
A treaty is based on trust and the Federation has proven that they cannot be trusted to uphold their own laws.
Bacco is part of the coverup and is guilty of being an accessory after the fact.
It's a fact that the Federation armed the Tezwa with illegal weapons under the Khitomer Accords. It's also a fact that Starfleet officers removed a democratically elected official from office. Starfleet was also involved, in the person of Admiral Ross, in President Zife's murder. For all of this, Admiral Ross was made to resign. No further action was undertaken. Everyone involved simply swept it under the rug and hoped that nobody would ever look there.
Should Iran/Contra have not been exposed? Should the government and the press have worked together to cover up the illegal sale of arms to a hostile power?
If you discover wrong doing, you expose it, press charges, have a trial, render a verdict and pass sentence. That's what democracies do. They don't break treaties, cover it up, allow the military to decide the fitness of the civilian government to govern and assist in the assassination of a government official.
If the Federation had caught the Klingons doing something similar, would they declare that all Klingons had been involved and go to war?
A treaty is based on trust and the Federation has proven that they cannot be trusted to uphold their own laws.
Bacco is part of the coverup and is guilty of being an accessory after the fact.
* I admit that there have been individuals in both the civilian government and in Starfleet, that have put their own selfish needs before those of others, but no political government in the galaxy that wants to peacefully explore the galaxy and interact with others in the same manner, has anything to worry about regarding the Federation. Ever since its inception, the Federation has been the one galactic power that has protected and secured the galaxy from governments like the Romulans and the Dominion, who have historically sought only conqest and expansion(the only Romulans that have seen the error of their government and military's way, is the IRS). If the Tholians wanted peace and cared about others like most Federation citizens do, they wouldn't have joined a group with less-than-reputable governments like the Romulan Star Empire, and the Gorn should have joined the Federation that saved their people from near extinction. Either way you put it, the Federation is the way to go.
Last edited:
I think the point people are trying to make is simply that there's a difference between your personal reaction to a character and your assumptions about the creator's intent behind the character. If you say you don't like Bacco, fine, that's your opinion and you're perfectly entitled to it. But if you assert the belief that she was created as an anti-Bush polemic or an Obama surrogate, that's an assumption about factual matters and is provably false. But saying you're wrong about the creator's intent is not the same thing as saying you're wrong in your reaction to the character, because those are two distinct issues. One is fact, the other opinion. So we're not saying you have to like Bacco, merely pointing out that your assumptions about the intent behind her creation are in error.
You assume the klingons are that forgiving, considering that Worf had to talk them down from taking vengeance on the Tholians in 2376 after finding out what they did 100 years ago and it sounded like THAT was difficult to accomplish and the Tholians were already a power they weren't all rosey and happy with as it was. So yeah they would be pissed off seeing as it has only been a few years since Tezwa. Plus with the Orion Syndicate and Section 31 involved not to mention the choas the Borg unleashed it's likely any evidence is dead and burried, I mean do we even know if Tezwa is still around in 2381.
Also the journalist who found it was willing to leave it covered up in exchange for getting rid of Ross, so theres that.
Besides I may be wrong but wasn't the only reason Baco was involved was becuase the report decided to rather than expose the issue (and getting offed by the Syndicate as per the rules of them giving the reporter the Tezwa info if she did so without another source for this which she didn't have hence the ultimatum) to instead letr Baco choose between this being exposed and getting rid of Ross? Kind of hard to blame a person who is goinf about the business of running a government then some reporters shows up and gives them two options on a situation that knew nothing about which get rid of someone who had the last president removed and killed for violating a treaty signed in good faith, causing the deaths of many many military personal to cover that up becuasde it risked a war that could distablize the quadrant, or have this all exposed and likely get the massive war it was all done to prevent. I mean in this situation your asking for a person to choose whether there morals are more important than the lives of billions here.
And besides what the hell does all this have to do with the Typhon Pact anyway?
Last edited:
I believe I originally stated "she seems like she was written in as a dream president during the Bush years - not sure if she was supposed to be a (Hilary) Clinton or Obama analogue or a combination of both."
I've never stated it as fact, just said that my read of her came off that way.
All right, then take the responses as clarification of the actual intent. If you say you're "not sure" about something, it shouldn't be surprising if others take it as a request for clarification.
Who was the Buffy pastiche?
That's really not true. I actually created the character for an e-mail RPG back in 1996, before Buffy premiered and before I had any idea who Joss Whedon was. As an RPG character, she was really based more on myself than anyone else, or rather on the kind of person I imagine I could be if I were less shy, reserved, and risk-averse. Her sense of humor is the same one that runs in the Bennett family, though perhaps a little raunchier.
But when I was describing her to Dave Mack so he could use her in Destiny, I figured that the best shorthand to tell someone else how to write her was "Think of her as a Joss Whedon character." And I later repeated that analogy here on the board (mainly to counter assertions that she was "a Peter David character"). But I only meant it as an analogy after the fact. I never intended it to be construed as a statement of my inspiration for the character.
I never said he was wrong to dislike Bacco, I said he was wrong to make certain specific assumptions about why the character was created and what the character's function is meant to be.
But you never allowed for the possibility that Bacco is not meant as an analogue for Clinton or Obama or a combo, but is in fact not an analogue for anyone at all. You made an assumption that the character exists as an anti-Bush polemic and then refused to acknowledge that that assumption was unfair.
Bingo.
Christopher also used this shorthand description when advising me how to write Trys for Losing the Peace. I think we can all agree that, intentionally or not, there was little Whedonality to her in that novel.
As noted above, I was indeed referring to T'Ryssa Chen. I was actually unaware that the issue had been discussed on the boards and was merely referring to my strong impression upon first encountering the character that she was Whedon-esque in a way that I did not find especially appealing within the context of the Trek universe.
However, I was using the term "pastiche" more in a figurative than literal sense, speaking more to the results on the page than authorial intent to actually imitate one style or another. Obviously, certain similarities can crop up unintentionally, and certain character types tend to float around from one property to another throughout pop culture, it is not only in Trek Lit that this happens.
Well, thanks all for the semantic argument. The lessons I've learned here will help me always. I feel wiser for being told how to think and that if my words on a Star Trek message board aren't precise, that I'll then have to argue about it for 4 pages, when my only real point was that I don't like a character. Thank you for telling me why my reasons are wrong. This place has been made much more fun for it.
Most importantly, Sci, if I tell you you win, will you stop responding to my posts? Can I make that work in perpetuity?
Most importantly, Sci, if I tell you you win, will you stop responding to my posts? Can I make that work in perpetuity?
So, I'm assuming everyone else liked Counsellor House on Voyager, too, since he's not getting any grief?
More importantly, what does everyone thing House would do if he were crowned King of the Typhon Pact? My guess; make crass remarks about the new praetor's age and bust size.
More importantly, what does everyone thing House would do if he were crowned King of the Typhon Pact? My guess; make crass remarks about the new praetor's age and bust size.