What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[korblborp]

saru carries that show

 

[Tallguy]

Some folks aren’t comfortable with people from the other side of the aisle, regardless of content. So I tossed in a fair warning considering that this is Left-leaning board.

I didn't get to finish the Robocop vid but I'd call this guy libertarian rather than conservative. IMHO. (I did watch his video on Biggs Darklighter's scenes in Star Wars last night and I loved it. Not necessarily for the opinions but for the fairly solid facts about movie production and why there is an almost zero chance that those scene ever saw the light of the projector bulb.)

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.

Wow. Def on Saru. But that must be some cat. I kinda liked Disco (sometimes) but I'm stuck in season... 4? I'll finish it someday. Maybe after SNW this year when I'm going into my traditional SNW DTs.

I've still got a lot of Voyager and Enterprise to catch up on though...

 

[fireproof78]

I didn't even finish the Garfield movie and I love Garfield more than any other cat.

 

[Shawnster]

Controversial opinion.....

Sisko, while one of the more interesting and dynamic characters in the franchise, was a poor role model and kind of a war criminal.

I asked ChatGPT

Based on his conduct in star trek DS9 is Ben Sisko a war criminal.

Benjamin Sisko is **not a war criminal** under the legal and ethical frameworks portrayed in *Star Trek: Deep Space Nine* (DS9), nor under most real-world definitions of war crimes. However, some of his actions—especially in "In the Pale Moonlight" and other morally gray episodes—raise compelling ethical questions and would likely be controversial under modern interpretations of military and international law.


### Conclusion

**Is Ben Sisko a war criminal?**

* **Legally in Starfleet’s eyes:** No. Starfleet never charges or even reprimands him.
* **By real-world standards:** He operates in morally gray areas and could be *accused* of war crimes depending on interpretation, especially in the Maquis and Romulan deception cases.
* **Narratively:** DS9 *intentionally* blurs the line between heroism and moral compromise. Sisko represents a wartime commander forced to make horrific choices, which makes him one of the most complex characters in *Star Trek*.

Sisko is **not a war criminal**, but he *is* a man who committed ethically dubious acts and is deeply affected by them—something *DS9* portrays with rare emotional honesty.

 

[Farscape One]

saru carries that show

By the Prophets, that is so accurate. Saru was by far the best character. Consistently.

 

[BillJ]

Sisko is **not a war criminal**, but he *is* a man who committed ethically dubious acts and is deeply affected by them—something *DS9* portrays with rare emotional honesty.

ChatGPT needs to go home, its drunk.

 

[Airin]

You all really need to stop asking chat gpt about anything. It's neither conscious, nor intelligent, nor an oracle. It's just a pastiche of stolen articles from the internet. Asking your dog would be more productive (at least the dog will be happy for the attention).

 

[Firebird]

I don't need ChatGPT to make the decision for me. That's what my own damn brain is for.

 

[at Quark's]

You all really need to stop asking chat gpt about anything. It's neither conscious, nor intelligent, nor an oracle. It's just a pastiche of stolen articles from the internet. Asking your dog would be more productive (at least the dog will be happy for the attention).

This.

It's ultimately just a slightly more user friendly version of google. (Nothing wrong with using it, as long as you realise its limits).

This may change the moment true AI is invented, but that moment is not yet, AFAIK.

 

[fireproof78]

I have limited interest in ChatGpt. Not much interest in animal opinions. I think I'll pass.

 

[Airin]

This.

It's ultimately just a slightly more user friendly version of google. (Nothing wrong with using it, as long as you realise its limits).

This may change the moment true AI is invented, but that moment is not yet, AFAIK.

Even then, google search allows you to verify the authorship and credibility of the source, and it seems is far less polluting for the environment:

https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2025/03/17/chatgpt-deepseek-co-how-much-energy-do-ai-powered-chatbots-consume

So, if it has no real advantages, and on top of that has great disadvantages (ie. boiling up the planet), using it is a lose-lose situation.

I don't know if true AI will ever be invented (think of Data). I very much doubt it will be in my lifetime. But if it ever comes, I expect it to come rather from the medicine field. The same way they have created mechanical limbs, they may eventually create an electronic brain. But the current data-blenders don't seem to me neither the first step nor any step in that direction.

 

[kkt]

Controversial opinion.....

Sisko, while one of the more interesting and dynamic characters in the franchise, was a poor role model and kind of a war criminal.

He let his anger get the best of him and went on a rage fueled crusade againt Eddington that resulted in him committing an act of ethic cleansing agaist a Maquis colony.

Later, he directly played a part in the murder and cover-up of an innocent Romulan senator and his staff. While it can be argued that the and is justify the means, it was still murder, even if he didn't directly do the killing. He also continued to associate with Garak, a man he knows to be a stone cold killer, albeit a highly entertaining one.

The amusing part is that this all happened in the episode following the episode that introduced Section 31.

For all the talk about Section 31 being something the Federation should be morally above, Sisko sure seems like he'd make an excellent Section 31 agent.

Sisko would not have made a good Section 31 agent because he didn't actually enjoy that kind of work. He'd do it, once in a while, as part of the deal of being a CO, but wouldn't want the work to be nothing but secrecy and skullduggery and morally questionable actions.

 

[kkt]

The bombing of London, England by the German National Socialist Laborers and Workers Party...was a war crime with consequences.

The counter bombing of Hamburg Germany and of Dresden.

In a war, you are either fighting for your people, or are not fighting for your people. The ones that aren't fighting, are dead, sooner or later. Belgium...was in the way. Didn't fight. The Dutch did something interesting, however, instead of fighting to the death, or turning over their Jews.

THEY are put on the Yellow Star of David. They chose to die... Blessed are those Dutch.

There is a very good reason why there was a Deep Space Nine episode with its title in Latin. Translated: it read "In War The Law IS SILENT ".

This is a very complex question, and one could write a very long paper on it.

But it boils down to this: Pearl Harbor.

In some parts of the United States, some are now saying that we should not have reacted at all. This shows a complete lack of understanding.

Early 1990s motion picture 'The Untouchables', with Sean Connery paying the part of a beat cop...on a bridge talking to a FBI agent. 'If one of them beats one of yours, then send one of them to the hospital, if one of them sends one of yours to the hospital, then send one of theirs to the morgue. '

If you and them are totally pacifists...then no problem. But surrender will bring even worse problems. The Dominion HAD to be stopped. Period. This is what they were designed for. The Cardasians HAD to be stopped.

Not to do so would have been worse...

Saying the United States should not have responded to Pearl Harbor? That's news to me. Who says that?

 

[FredH]

I didn't get to finish the Robocop vid but I'd call this guy libertarian rather than conservative. IMHO. (I did watch his video on Biggs Darklighter's scenes in Star Wars last night and I loved it. Not necessarily for the opinions but for the fairly solid facts about movie production and why there is an almost zero chance that those scene ever saw the light of the projector bulb.)

Feral Historian? So far he hasn’t struck me as conservative or even especially libertarian, though others would probably know better than I.

 

[knightgrace]

Saying the United States should not have responded to Pearl Harbor? That's news to me. Who says that?

Pay attention to the news. There are groups out in America that are poorly educated, is the best way to begin to understand them.
For at least thirty years I have been hearing about this on the radio and TV.
We, the United States, should get the blame, not Japan. Then they go on a tear about FDR's foreign policy, ignoring the reasons for his policies. Like what Japan was doing in China, to the Chinese. Japan invaded China for China's resources...

Like I said before one could write an entire paper on this.

 

[1001001]

Pay attention to the news. There are groups out in America that are poorly educated, is the best way to begin to understand them.
For at least thirty years I have been hearing about this on the radio and TV.
We, the United States, should get the blame, not Japan. Then they go on a tear about FDR's foreign policy, ignoring the reasons for his policies. Like what Japan was doing in China, to the Chinese. Japan invaded China for China's resources...

Like I said before one could write an entire paper on this.

Be that as it may...

Back to Star Trek.

 

[Forbin]

The counter bombing of Hamburg Germany and of Dresden.

Both legitimate strategic targets - Hamburg being a major port city with factories and shipyards; Dresden being a rail hub for transporting materiel to the Russian front. The hyping of the latter as innocent was one of Himmler's propaganda successes.

 

[Tallguy]

Early 1990s motion picture 'The Untouchables'

1987. The summer before TNG.

 

[at Quark's]

So, if it has no real advantages, and on top of that has great disadvantages (ie. boiling up the planet), using it is a lose-lose situation.

Hadn't considered it from an environmental angle yet, I think you've got a point.

But I also get an AI overview answer from google these days, whether I want to or not. (It seems this feature can be hidden but not truly turned off.)

 

[XCV330]

i think that might be one of the biggest things future generations condemn us for: in the midst of an existential climate crisis, we find a way to pour excess heat and drive power generation demands higher, for literally no reason. there weren't throngs of people saying "I need something to generate an opinion for me, or show me an attractive woman who looks vaguely like King Kong era Jessica Lange but with three rows of teeth" sorry that's very specific and I don't know why I wrote that,.. no one needed or wanted it. Its the fentanyl of tech. hey we got stuff that's already going to make you feel good for a few minutes but ruin your life and kill you.. but now we have something even easier to produce that will do it faster. It's not like the Talliban was slowing down poppy production.

tech oligarchs just said: you will use this. a lot. And we said. "no we won't" and we did.

there should be some poignant star trek episode that draws a thoughtful parable to it we can all ignore.