Villains of Star Trek

[horatio83]

EDIT: You keep going on about right and wrong, but the fact of the matter is that Picard should've recused the Federation from the whole thing the moment he learned it was a blood feud. But if he'd done that, the Ba'ku would've been moved or executed and the planet stripped of the particles anyway. So Picard ignored the mighty Prime Directive when it no longer worked for him.

The next moment he met Dougherty he informed him about his learnings. He was incarcerated on a Son'a ship and his next actions were to stop mass murder while he no longer wore a uniform.
What's up Dougherty, I await the next cheap shot against Picard. Hurry up, you have little time before the authorities put you in jail or before your lovely allies stab you in the back.

 

[T'Girl]

As the movies stands the Feds simply violate the Prime Directive as they believe it is a pre-warp civilization.

Exactly how does the "Fed" believe it's a pre-warp civilization? They know that the Baku are not indigenous to the planet, which means they came from elsewhere, which means warp drive.

Now Picard might have briefly thought the Baku were pre-warp, but even he figured it out pretty fast.

.

 

[Vasquez Rocks]

Unlike you I am aware of the first rule of the Federation and I am aware that it is not an imperial or colonial power.

Yes. We also all agree that murder is wrong, yet there are situations where it is warranted. Even the holier-than-thou Federation still has the death penalty during TOS.

Sometimes life and principles just don't match up. To paraphrase Captain Spock, "even ethics must give way to reality". The Federation simply sits in "no mans land" in regards to the Ba'ku, damned if they move them, will be criticized if they leave them alone and they get slaughtered.

EDIT: You keep going on about right and wrong, but the fact of the matter is that Picard should've recused the Federation from the whole thing the moment he learned it was a blood feud. But if he'd done that, the Ba'ku would've been moved or executed and the planet stripped of the particles anyway. So Picard ignored the mighty Prime Directive when it no longer worked for him.

Actually, Picard didn't ignore the PD. He found out about the blood feud towards the end of the movie in the middle of a battle with Son'a soldiers. The moment he is beamed aboard Ru'afo's ship and in front of Dougherty he tells him about the Ba'ku and Son'a being the same race. Dougherty agrees with Picard that it is indeed a blood feud and says to Ru'afo that he is ending the mission and pulling out which in turn gets him stretched to death.

 

[horatio83]

EDIT: You keep going on about right and wrong, but the fact of the matter is that Picard should've recused the Federation from the whole thing the moment he learned it was a blood feud.

I disagree with you here, the petty little spat between the Baku and the Sona was none of the Federation's business, but the Federation out and out owned the particles.

The suggestion (elsewhere) that the Baku should be compensated for the particles make no sense. They don't possess them and don't control them, the Federation does. If (hypothetically) the Federation didn't own-possess-control the particles, why would the Sona wish a partnership with the Federation in the first place? The means of harvesting the particles rested in the hands of the Sona. What did the Federation bring to the table?

Oh, that's right, it their planet and their particles.

You totally disregard the seperation between territory and citizenship as well as basic theory about resource rents. This is simply an uninformed post that is nothing but a petty apology for theft.

As the movies stands the Feds simply violate the Prime Directive as they believe it is a pre-warp civilization.

Exactly how does the "Fed" believe it's a pre-warp civilization?.

Watch the movie, in particular the first act. Before the incident with Data, before Picard is forced to talk with the Ba'ku to get the "hostages" back the Federation has believed that the Ba'ku are pre-warp.

 

[BillJ]

The next moment he met Dougherty he informed him about his learnings. He was incarcerated on a Son'a ship and his next actions were to stop mass murder while he no longer wore a uniform.
What's up Dougherty, I await the next cheap shot against Picard. Hurry up, you have little time before the authorities put you in jail or before your lovely allies stab you in the back.

Oh! Wait a minute! Now it's okay for Picard to interfere? He doesn't even ask Dougherty if they should back out. Sorry Dude, either you believe in General Order One or you don't. In for a penny, in for a pound. Picard has no legal standing to stop Ru'afo.

Captain's log, supplemental. The Enterprise has left the Exeter and moved into close planet orbit. Although it appears the infection may strand us here the rest of our lives, I face an even more difficult problem. A growing belief that Captain Tracey has been interfering with the evolution of life on this planet. It seems impossible. A star captain's most solemn oath is that he will give his life, even his entire crew, rather than violate the Prime Directive.

So do you believe in the Prime Directive or not? Or does the situation dictate how practical it is to follow certain moral codes or laws?

 

[Vasquez Rocks]

People keep saying that the Federation own the planet, but the Ba'ku settled there over three hundred years ago, before the Federation existed. Does that mean they lose their rights to the planet?

 

[BillJ]

People keep saying that the Federation own the planet, but the Ba'ku settled there over three hundred years ago, before the Federation existed. Does that mean they lose their rights to the planet?

People who colonized the United States before its formation were bound by its laws after its formation.

 

[horatio83]

The next moment he met Dougherty he informed him about his learnings. He was incarcerated on a Son'a ship and his next actions were to stop mass murder while he no longer wore a uniform.
What's up Dougherty, I await the next cheap shot against Picard. Hurry up, you have little time before the authorities put you in jail or before your lovely allies stab you in the back.

Oh! Wait a minute! Now it's okay for Picard to interfere? He doesn't even ask Dougherty if they should back out. Sorry Dude, either you believe in General Order One or you don't. In for a penny, in for a pound. Picard has no legal standing to stop Ru'afo.

From a fellow who defends Dougherty this is obviously just stupid sophistry but I respond nonetheless to bring some sense into this discussion.

No uniform, no orders. Siding with the Ba'ku is already a PD violation. But it is the only way to protect them from deportation and death. It is in other words an action in the spirit of the PD, an action that serves the goal of stopping the Federation of messing with people.
Stopping the killing of your own people as well as the Ba'ku has nothing to do with the PD, it is obviously the only thing to do.

 

[BillJ]

The next moment he met Dougherty he informed him about his learnings. He was incarcerated on a Son'a ship and his next actions were to stop mass murder while he no longer wore a uniform.
What's up Dougherty, I await the next cheap shot against Picard. Hurry up, you have little time before the authorities put you in jail or before your lovely allies stab you in the back.

Oh! Wait a minute! Now it's okay for Picard to interfere? He doesn't even ask Dougherty if they should back out. Sorry Dude, either you believe in General Order One or you don't. In for a penny, in for a pound. Picard has no legal standing to stop Ru'afo.

From a fellow who defends Dougherty this is obviously just stupid sophistry but I respond nonetheless to bring some sense into this discussion.

No uniform, no orders. Siding with the Ba'ku is already a PD violation. But it is the only way to protect them from deportation and death. It is in other words an action in the spirit of the PD, an action that serves the goal of stopping the Federation of messing with people.
Stopping the killing of your own people as well as the Ba'ku has nothing to do with the PD, it is obviously the only thing to do.

That's not what the Prime Directive says. So do you believe in it or not?

If it was known that the S'ona and Ba'ku were one and the same from the get-go, no one could've stopped the extermination or moving of the Ba'ku under the Prime Directive.

The Prime Directive is probably why the Ba'ku didn't cop to knowing the S'ona from the beginning even though they were within a couple feet of each other...

PICARD: Our people have a strict policy of non-interference in other cultures. It's our Prime Directive.

 

[horatio83]

People keep saying that the Federation own the planet, but the Ba'ku settled there over three hundred years ago, before the Federation existed. Does that mean they lose their rights to the planet?

Indeed. The Ba'ku have been there first, just like the Indians have been first in North America. Yet we Europeans took it because we told ourselves that the place belongs to us. Picard also pointed out this historic similarity and while the case is more complex as space geography is more complex (the planet lies in Federation space but it belongs to the Son'a and Ba'ku) and as there have been millions of Indians but only a few hundred Ba'ku it is nonetheless the best comparison.
Everything boils down to good ol' colonialism, stealing a place and its resources.

 

[T'Girl]

Exactly how does the "Fed" believe it's a pre-warp civilization? They know that the Baku are not indigenous to the planet, which means they came from elsewhere, which means warp drive.

Watch the movie, in particular the first act. Before the incident with Data, before Picard is forced to talk with the Ba'ku to get the "hostages" back the Federation has believed that the Ba'ku are pre-warp.

Before Picard speaks to the Admiral, the Admiral is already aware that the Baku are not indigenous.

Again, Picard is under the impression the Baku are pre-warp, not the Federation.

People keep saying that the Federation own the planet, but the Ba'ku settled there over three hundred years ago, before the Federation existed. Does that mean they lose their rights to the planet?

Acording the timeline of the Brier Patch as mention in multiple Star Trek series and episodes, when the Baku arrived in the Patch it was Romulan territory, then it was Klingon territory, at some point approximately a century prior to the movie it became Federation territory.

It was never Baku territory.

Enterprise says it was Romulan, DS9 says it was Klingon, and Picard says it is Federation.

.

 

[horatio83]

That's not what the Prime Directive says. So do you believe in it or not?

If it was known that the S'ona and Ba'ku were one and the same from the get-go, no one could've stopped the extermination or moving of the Ba'ku under the Prime Directive.

About your question, I am not the one who defends Dougherty.

Yes, if the Son'a had intended to eradicate the Ba'ku this would be a civil war and thus not a matter of concern for the Federation unless the Ba'ku asked them for help. Yet the tricky space geography, Ba'ku belonging to he Son'a and Ba'ku but lieing in Federation space, might make the issue more complicated.
I know that you find this idea lunatic but if you think about the Klingon civil war you understand perhaps why the Federation must not interfere with the internal matters of other civilizations. Interspecies ethics are totally counter-intuitive, that's why they are so great. Not that it is my duty to explain the Prime Directive, anybody who has seen a bit of Trek should be familiar with the reasons for the Prime Directive.

Back to our case, Picard primarily fought against the involvement of the Federation in a crime. It's kinda like with people who fight against death penalty or torture, they might care less for the to-be-executed or to-be-tortured and more about the general state of a society which executes and tortures.

 

[BillJ]

About your question, I am not the one who defends Dougherty.

Well, Dougherty is right.

Yes, if the Son'a had intended to eradicate the Ba'ku this would be a civil war and thus not a matter of concern for the Federation unless the Ba'ku asked them for help. Yet the tricky space geography, Ba'ku belonging to he Son'a and Ba'ku but lieing in Federation space, might make the issue more complicated.

Nope. The Federation cannot help the Ba'ku even if they ask for it. That is established in Redemption II.

So are you still in favor to total devotion to the Prime Directive or do you think there are circumstances where it doesn't fit? I know the Federation and Starfleet believe there are circumstances that don't fit or else there wouldn't be forty-seven subsections of it and the Omega Directive.

 

[horatio83]

]Acording the timeline of the Brier Patch as mention in multiple Star Trek series and episodes, when the Baku arrived in the Patch it was Romulan territory, then it was Klingon territory, at some point approximately a century prior to the movie it became Federation territory.

It was never Baku territory.

Enterprise says it was Romulan, DS9 says it was Klingon, and Picard says it is Federation.

OK, you guys have still issues with space geography. Let's try to explain it via an example, the end of the Romulan War. The Federation got a lot of Romulan territories and on these planets there either live Romulans or species conquered by the Romulans. Have they automatically become Federation citizens? Obviously not. After all you pointed out frequently that the Federation is, as the name says, a federal structure of interplanetary government that consists of member planets which have to join willingly and which can quit the club at any time.
As the Ba'ku have never joined the Federation their planet does not belong to the Federation. It lies in Federation space yet it belongs to the Ba'ku and Son'a. This makes the issue pretty tricky as, this is a point Bill made in the very beginning, a war affects not merely the planet but also the Federation; you have to invade Federation territory in order to gain control over Ba'ku.

Again, Picard is under the impression the Baku are pre-warp, not the Federation.

Sorry, my mistake. In combination with what I wrote above, if the Admiral knows that this is a warp civilization, why doesn't he simply talk with the Ba'ku and explain the eviction to them? Why not discuss with them the potential planets they could settle on, why not talk about the future provision of medicine, why all the secrecy? In the movie it is a kidnapping, if it were an orderly eviction I wouldn't protest that much.

 

[horatio83]

About your question, I am not the one who defends Dougherty.

Well, Dougherty is right.

Yes, if the Son'a had intended to eradicate the Ba'ku this would be a civil war and thus not a matter of concern for the Federation unless the Ba'ku asked them for help. Yet the tricky space geography, Ba'ku belonging to he Son'a and Ba'ku but lieing in Federation space, might make the issue more complicated.

Nope. The Federation cannot help the Ba'ku even if they ask for it. That is established in Redemption II.

So are you still in favor to total devotion to the Prime Directive or do you think there are circumstances where it doesn't fit? I know the Federation and Starfleet believe there are circumstances that don't fit or else there wouldn't be forty-seven subsections of it and the Omega Directive.

After the Omega Directive the Prime Directive is the rule number two. What I think or don't think doesn't matter. Of course it is a complex rule, there are probably libraries (or isolinear chips) full of texts about PD cases.
We have seen many tricky PD cases in the history of Trek, e.g. "Pen Pals". It was dubious for Data to chat with a girl from a pre-warp civilization but after she asked for help it is fair to say that Picard and his crew were obliged to help.
Doughtery's case on the other hand is as crystal clear as Tracy's or Gill's. Besides violating the PD he committed other crimes. The true horror is of course what we don't see and what the movie should have delved into, that Dougherty did not reveal everything to the council but had their green light, that he wasn't a single criminal but that the parliament of the Federation was willing to ignore the most basic principles in order to gain a new ally in the Dominion War.

 

[BillJ]

After the Omega Directive the Prime Directive is the rule number two.

But you've been going on and on about the Prime Directive being the Federation's highest law...

What I think or don't think doesn't matter. Of course it is a complex rule, there are probably libraries (or isolinear chips) full of texts about PD cases.

Sure it matters. It allows us to frame the debate.

We have seen many tricky PD cases in the history of Trek, e.g. "Pen Pals". It was dubious for Data to chat with a girl from a pre-warp civilization but after she asked for help it is fair to say that Picard and his crew were obliged to help.

The difference being the Federation isn't picking sides in a political squabble.

Doughtery's case on the other hand is as crystal clear as Tracy's or Gill's.

If Dougherty is following the orders of the Federation Council, it stands to reason that the relocation of the Ba'ku fall under one of those forty-seven subsections. Like I've said in other threads, you can argue the ethics of it but legally Daugherty and Company are clean.

 

[horatio83]

A parliament can pass a law that violates the constitution. That's why we have Supreme Court. Furthermore you gotta differentiate between formal legality and actual content. My very own country has been a formal democracy between '33 and '45 but obviously it was a fascist country. Same with the torture memos in your country, they might be fine from a formally legal perspective but they have obviously been one step towards a police state.

You can of course argue that Dougherty has not violated the PD just like you could claim that Tracey and Gill are innocent. I actually hope that somebody like Ron Tracey gets access to a lawyer with expertise in the PD.
But I am an economist and not a lawyer and none of us knows the fictional law apparatus behind the PD. All we have is our common sense and the bunch of episodes that deal with the PD. Based on them I view Dougherty as crystal-clear case.

I think the tricky issue is the geographical one which you mentioned in the beginning, what if a foreign force invades Federation territory in order to occupy Ba'ku. This clearly implies that in the case of Ba'ku or any other planet inside Federation territory the PD is not as binding as in the case of a planet outside of the Federation; the UFP is automatically already involved to some degree. But independent of the PD I view the kidnapping of a people as opposed to an orderly eviction as a serious crime. Furthermore Dougherty implies that he would not freely share the medicine with the Ba'ku which is another serious crime. That's like kidnapping somebody and throwing them into a toxic waste dump.

 

[BillJ]

A parliament can pass a law that violates the constitution. That's why we have Supreme Courts.

I would make the argument that the way the Prime Directive is written, is simply an impossible notion for a space-faring race that has exploration as a prime goal. By setting foot on alien soil you could be setting things into motion that would devastate the civilization for centuries to come. Not to mention duck blind missions which are, by there very nature, an invasion of foreign soil.

The human need to explore is at odds with the Prime Directive.

You can of course argue that Dougherty has not violated the PD just like you could claim that Tracey and Gill are innocent. I actually hope that somebody like Ron Tracey gets access to a lawyer with expertise in the PD.

I think Ron Tracey would be an interesting test of the Prime Directive. Did anyone envision a sole survivor of a doomed expedition being the only thing between savage hordes and a peaceful village?

But I am an economist and not a lawyer and none of us knows the fictional law apparatus behind the PD. All we have is our common sense and the bunch of episodes that deal with the PD. Based on them I view Dougherty as crystal-clear case.

Which is why this is a great place to talk trek. We can simply agree to disagree. Or we can continue to beat each other over the head with episode references.

 

[horatio83]

As they say, you can debate like Tellarites if you drink afterwards like Andorians.

 

[CmndrSela318]

KHAAAAAAAN!!!
I think Khan was the best Trek villian...EVER.

Close second was the Borg.

3rd would be the Dominion.

4th is the Klingons.

Sela...who is one my favorite Trek character...came across as a good girl trying a little too hard to be bad. That's my theory on why all her schemes failed.

I think the WORST villian(s)...Khan being the exception...was any "villian" on any of TOS 79 episodes.