Very true, as we've learned in the US.
What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
Very true, as we've learned in the US.
technically the Orange Antichrist is a felon.
A 34-time felon.
As many teens tell me and are encouraged by adults with alcohol and marijuana.
I was talking about Sisko, and many, many, many others. I do not have to name him. Especially since we were talking about Sisko.
Sisko wasn't operating in a vacuum, he was operating with a known historical knowledge base.
If you enforce the rules of law against, you then a few generations down the line, will cause a mass death event.
The real trick is to see a problem coming and divert it from happening. Keeping in mind that someone else may have different plans, due to their own lack of vision.
If you can't see the next step await bad trouble, caused by your inaction.
In 1972 in Congers New York, a school bus went out on a run, with a substitute driver. There was little to no documentation of the route. By accident he went the exact reverse on the route. Result: the school bus was early to a set of train tracks, at exactly the wrong time and place. Six children killed. He had to live with that fact for the rest of his life.
He committed a crime. Was he responsible?
Look it up.
Sisko wasn't operating in a vacuum, he was operating with a known historical knowledge base.
If you enforce the rules of law against, you then a few generations down the line, will cause a mass death event.
The real trick is to see a problem coming and divert it from happening. Keeping in mind that someone else may have different plans, due to their own lack of vision.
If you can't see the next step await bad trouble, caused by your inaction.
In 1972 in Congers New York, a school bus went out on a run, with a substitute driver. There was little to no documentation of the route. By accident he went the exact reverse on the route. Result: the school bus was early to a set of train tracks, at exactly the wrong time and place. Six children killed. He had to live with that fact for the rest of his life.
He committed a crime. Was he responsible?
Look it up.
Yes. Trains aren’t silent.
No, you were talking about WW2, trains and various other topics that feel highly unrelated, and connect more to an argument of pro war than to Sisko. Regardless of the justification was this a crime?
If the answer is, "Yes, it's a war crime," then he is a war criminal.
I thought we weren't supposed to be getting into this kind of stuff on these boards.
It's not ideal but with the heated emotions going on right now the occasional comment will show up. Passions about the current situtation are going to leak into other forums, the key being to keep all the other forums from becoming dominated by them.
In World War II, Admiral Chester Nimitz authorized the assassination of Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, the leader of the Japanese Navy and architect of the attack on Pearl Harbor in 'Operation Vengeance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Vengeance
On April 14th, United States Intelligence found out that Admiral Yamamoto would be visiting the front lines in the Solomon Islands on April 18th, Admiral Nimitz authorized the shooting down of the plane carrying Yamamoto on April 17th, and the assassination was carried out on April 18th. Every pilot chosen for the mission knew who they were going after. I doubt Admiral Nimitz and the others involved in the assassination lost any sleep over the killing of a high-ranking Japanese Naval Officer and the one who planned the attack on Pearl Harbor. Nimitz today is considered one of the greatest military leaders of World War II and no one bats an eyelash over his actions in ordering the assassination of Admiral Yamamoto.
I'm sure if an opportunity arose to assassinate Hitler - Roosevelt, Churchill, Eisenhower, Montgomery would have authorized it without hesitation.
In war, good men are sometimes called upon to do the wrong thing for the right reason.
I'm sure if an opportunity arose to assassinate Hitler - Roosevelt, Churchill, Eisenhower, Montgomery would have authorized it without hesitation.
In war, good men are sometimes called upon to do the wrong thing for the right reason.
In war, we’re animals that have lost all sense of reason.
just stating a fact. he's a felon. deal with it.
You seem nice.
I am. I'm lovely. Let's be friends.
we're getting into the whole deontological vs consequentialism thing on the grand scale, and no one is going to be able to solve it. Trying to put a Kantian perspective on an entire galactic scale civilization requires they act on moral imperatives every single time, when
A: those moral imperatives will differ from species to species and
B: assuming these supposed war crimes are in fact based on moral imperatives and not on some long ago agreed upon standard which was the result of a compromise that may not even be morally sound
Then you have to get it right before you act on anything. Kantian ethics kind of goes down the toilet once real stuff happens. UFP certainly does seem to try to act on moral imperatives but when their system is stretched to the breaking point, you get a character like the Sisko deciding more and more how utilitarian he can be.. which is kind of the Sisko's journey from the moment his wife died by a Borg attack caused by Mr. Kantian Ethics himself, Captain Picard, to the moment he becomes a deity.
Last edited:
Damn it, Sisko, just be human!
I love The Original Series, Next Generation, DS9, and Voyager, but I really don’t like most of Modern Trek, with the exception of Lower Decks, Prodigy, and the third Season of Star Trek Picard.
The only reason I stuck it out through the entire series of Discovery was Doug Jones, the late Kenneth Mitchell, and, in the end, that darn cat. The rest of the series was just not my thing.
The only reason I stuck it out through the entire series of Discovery was Doug Jones, the late Kenneth Mitchell, and, in the end, that darn cat. The rest of the series was just not my thing.
The cat, was the best.
Similar threads
- Locked
