What is your fav under appreciated DS9 episode?

[kitsune]

Statistical Probabilities (a lot people lump this great episode together with the garbage episode Chrysalis, which should never be done IMO)

Chrysalis

After conducting that survey a few months ago, I'm not sure my stock answer, Chrysalis, is actually as under-appreciated as I thought, either, though...

For me, both Statistical Probabilities and Chrysalis are under-appreciated.

Glad to see some love for Chrysalis. I don't understand how anyone can dislike that episode.

 

[Stone_Cold_Sisko]

Business As Usual
A Quark episode with a DEADLY SERIOUS plot. No Ferengi nonsense, no cute Klingon romance comedy, no nothing. It's brilliant. And Quark behaves in character the ENTIRE way through. IMO it's by far the best Quark episode of the series.

Also these are all well-liked but I think they are phenomenal as in Top 10 episodes:
Rapture
In the Cards
Statistical Probabilities

 

[Pemmer Harge]

Chrysalis has its problems, but I think it's nowhere near being one of DS9's worst. It deserves a thumbs up if only for the bit where they all sing!

I'll also give a mention to Time's Orphan, the only episode in all the seven seasons to bring a tear to my eye. Yes, it's deeply flawed, but I'll always have a soft spot for that one.

 

[flemm]

I'm going to add the season 7 opening two-parter, Image in the Sand and Shadows and Symbols, to this list. These episodes don't get talked about much, but it's a solid beginning to season three that also ties up several loose threads from the prior season: the new Dax is introduced, The Sisko gets his mojo back, Jadzia gets a fitting send-off and Kira deals with complications from the Romulans' involvement in the war.

What stands out to me here is how skillfully these various threads are woven together and gather momentum. The end result is surprisingly cohesive, culminating in the moment when the wormhole reopens as Kira is bearing down on the Romulans and the Jem'Hadar shipyard is being destroyed.

I'm also a fan of how Benny Russell is brought back into the story as a "false vision" that ties back into Far Beyond the Stars: in the final two seasons DS9 is increasingly a "story about stories," which is perhaps a bit self-indulgent on the part of the writers, but I'm a sucker for narratives that invite the reader/viewer to unsuspend disbelief.

 

[DevilEyes]

^ They probably don't get talked about much in 'best of' threads because the "Sisko's Prophet Mom" retcon is pretty damn stupid in lots of ways (and makes the Prophets rather creepy, when you think about it).

The stuff with Kira and the Romulans is excellent, though.

 

[flemm]

^ They probably don't get talked about much in 'best of' threads because the "Sisko's Prophet Mom" retcon is pretty damn stupid in lots of ways

True undoubtedly as to why they are not brought up as "best of." However, while I don't think they are "best of" material, I suspect I disagree at least partially about Space Jesus. Could you explain? Perhaps there are layers of stupidity I have not perceived?

(and makes the Prophets rather creepy, when you think about it).

Undoubtedly a bit creepy, but that is intentional, no? I don't think we are meant to react as if this were a banal revelation, but rather as a mysterious, troubling one?

The stuff with Kira and the Romulans is excellent, though.

Yes

 

[jadzia_dax2369]

hey fellow niners

mine are:
1) Field of fire
2) Dax
3) Afterimage

note all Dax episodes

 

[DGCatAniSiri]

I like them too, especially the last one ("The Emperor's New Cloak"), which is the most hated one of all for reasons I can't understand. I thought each one was an improvement over the previous one (although I never saw "Resurrection"). One of the reasons I liked "The Emperor's New Cloak" so much was because of the way it showed characters that had never been seen in mirror universe before being a part of it.

Mirror Ezri was great (the ONE and only time I thought the character showed ANY sex appeal) and the running gag of Rom (who I usually can't stand and find painfully annoying) being bewildered at everything in the mirror universe cracked me up. And the lesbian stuff was FUNNY too. Why anyone would take it seriously and find it offensive/insulting to their intelligence is beyond me.

I like the mirror universe episodes except New Cloak. The prior mirror universe episodes were were all darkly comical. New Cloak, though, was a straight up comedy. I know that in the time between Shattered Mirror and New Cloak, things are looking up for the Terrans, but it didn't have the same feel of the mirror universe that the others had; it didn't feel like a mirror universe episode - if Zek had been kidnapped by New Alien Race A instead of the Regent, the story being told would not have to undergo a major change. Part of the fun of the previous episodes is seeing our characters do something different than they would normally, but Quark and Rom do exactly what they would under normal circumstances.

And the hate of the lesbian stuff comes from the fact that the mirror universe, where our heroes are supposed to be the 'bad guys,' is (barring the Rejoined kiss, which has the whole 'Trill past lives' thing playing into it) the only place where there's been an actual 'lesbian' kiss. It's got unfortunate implications (and I know not the intended effect, but since when does what's intended and what the audience infers match up?) that being homosexual is somehow a 'bad' trait. I don't particularly agree with that view, but it's one that some very vocal people managed shout out.

As for underappreciated episodes, I think my vote goes for Civil Defense - it's a man versus machine story, where every solution makes another problem. It involves the characters having to use their brains to get out of the situation instead of relying entirely on a technobabble solution (though there is some of that, it's minimal enough not to dominate).

 

[DevilEyes]

^ They probably don't get talked about much in 'best of' threads because the "Sisko's Prophet Mom" retcon is pretty damn stupid in lots of ways

True undoubtedly as to why they are not brought up as "best of." However, while I don't think they are "best of" material, I suspect I disagree at least partially about Space Jesus. Could you explain? Perhaps there are layers of stupidity I have not perceived?

I meant stupid as in "utterly unnecessary and creating a lot of problems while not adding anything of value to the story".

Did we ever need another reason why Sisko is the Emissary of the Prophets? He found the Wormhole, he met the Prophets, he explained linear time to them, he forged a special connection to them, end of story. I don't think anyone was wondering why Sisko was the Emissary and asking for the "mystery" of his status to be revealed.

So now we find out that the Prophets, after they met Sisko, actually decided to arrange his birth in the past. Which, of course, means that they had always arranged his birth. O-kay. This is becoming a "chicken or egg" problem. The idea of non-linear beings can create such logical problems, but I'm not sure why the writers of DS9 decided to highlight them with this storyline. And really, WHY did the Prophets need to do that? If you were a Prophet and you met a humanoid you took to, why would you think "I have to arrange this being's birth, or else he'll never be born"? I mean, if someone exists, why would you think that you need to do something so he could get born, isn't it logical to assume that he already got born without your help?... But then, I guess the Prophets already knew that they had arranged his birth in the first place, which they did so he could meet them, and then they decided to arrange his birth.. Eh, this "chicken or egg" thing is not making more sense if you keep thinking about it.

And in the end, Sisko could just have been a normal human and nothing in the story would be different. So, what's the point of this whole reveal? Did Sisko need to be "more than human" to meet the Prophets? Nope. Other humanoids who went to the Wormhole met them and talked to them, too - Akorem Laan, Zek, Quark. Did Sisko need to be more than human in order to explain linear time to them? No, and that doesn't make sense - it's being human(oid) and linear that makes him able to understand the concept, and he used a popular human game to explain it to them. Even if they wanted to have Sisko join the Prophets in the end, it still could just as well have happened without the whole arranged birth thing. If the Prophets like someone, if they have chosen someone and decided to 'resurrect' him and have him live with them, they could have done it whether his birth had been arranged or not. It's not like he was physically any different. And it's not like they have more of a claim over him and more of a right to do what they want with him because they arranged his birth. At least I don't think so.

So what was the point? To make Sisko more "special"? Isn't it better to be special because of your own actions and you own choices and things that depend on you, rather than because of your birth? Sisko was always a very human character, it's a big part of his appeal. But then, for some reason, he had to be revealed as more than "just" human. Now he has a Prophet "mother" in addition to his Human mother. (Wait, which one is his real mom, again?) Now we learn that Sisko's fate had always been decided for him, even before his birth. What is that supposed to add to the story? It only takes away something.

And, finally, this reveal makes the Prophets incredibly creepy (more below)...

(and makes the Prophets rather creepy, when you think about it).

Undoubtedly a bit creepy, but that is intentional, no? I don't think we are meant to react as if this were a banal revelation, but rather as a mysterious, troubling one?

I don't mean creepy as "mysterious". I mean creepy as "disturbing and disgusting". Unless I missed something, Sarah did not want to marry Joseph, to conceive and give birth to Ben. Or else there would never have been any need for the Prophets to arrange the birth, would it? And since Sarah left Joseph and the child soon after she stopped being possessed by another entity, I think it's safe to say that all this happened against her will. It's highly unlikely that they revealed themselves to Sarah first and asked her for a permission. So, let's repeat this: a Prophet possessed the body of a woman and made her have sex, pretend to love a man, conceive and give birth, all against and regardless of her will. In the process, they also manipulated a man into falling in love with a woman who basically never actually existed, and then have her leave him and the child, without ever learning why and what it was all about.

If the idea behind this had been to portray the Prophets as manipulative assholes who treat humans as bodies to be used to their ends, then it was a good idea. But since season 7 attempted to portray the Prophets as good and their antagonists as evil, it really was a very bad idea.

 

[ClayHefner]

Not necessarily.
Even though it may sound awfully linear, the Prophets, "after" they got to know Sisko, kidnapped Akorem (and maybe changed other things in the regular universe's past), which may have messed up the timeline outside the CT.

So they had to actively make sure Sisko's mom and Dad met.

It still doesn't make any sense, I know.

 

[Pemmer Harge]

I'm going to add the season 7 opening two-parter, Image in the Sand and Shadows and Symbols, to this list. These episodes don't get talked about much, but it's a solid beginning to season three that also ties up several loose threads from the prior season: the new Dax is introduced, The Sisko gets his mojo back, Jadzia gets a fitting send-off and Kira deals with complications from the Romulans' involvement in the war.

Yes, I like those two as well, especially Shadows and Symbols. They were a strong start to the season, especially welcome since the end of Season 6 was a bit lackluster in my opinion. I liked how they weaved together several plot threads, which worked out pretty nicely in the end - it was a bit different to how DS9 had been before. I do think the stuff about Sisko's mother was ultimately unnecessary (would things have been any different without it?), but I liked how it was executed, with them trekking around in the desert and Sisko having another Benny Russell vision.

 

[PorthosShadow]

For me only one episode comes to mind "Move Along Home" if for no other reason because of the last line "It's only a game"

 

[flemm]

I meant stupid as in "utterly unnecessary and creating a lot of problems while not adding anything of value to the story".

I see. As expected, I partially disagree. I will say, however, that the Prophets/Emissary material from approximately The Reckoning onward, is not handled with the same elegance that characterizes episodes such as Destiny, Rapture, Sacrifice of Angels and Far Beyond the Stars, so I understand why these creative choices do not always inspire enthusiasm. I have mixed feelings about them myself.

I don't think anyone was wondering why Sisko was the Emissary and asking for the "mystery" of his status to be revealed.

I don't think this is relevant: there's no reason to conform to the audience's expectations. On the contrary, one function of this retcon is to bring the paradoxical nature of the Prophets as non-linear beings into sharper focus. Over the course of seven seasons, we become quite confortable with the idea of the wormhole aliens, but perhaps excessively so, to the point where they start to seem like "masters of the wormhole" essentially, rather than the enigmatic figures of the early stories such as Emissary.

So now we find out that the Prophets, after they met Sisko, actually decided to arrange his birth in the past. Which, of course, means that they had always arranged his birth. O-kay. This is becoming a "chicken or egg" problem. The idea of non-linear beings can create such logical problems, but I'm not sure why the writers of DS9 decided to highlight them with this storyline.

Precisely because the non-linear nature of the prophets' existence is what makes them an interesting sci-fi concept. As you suggest, the "chicken and the egg" problem is inherent to the idea of the Prophets from the beginning, and it's what gives them their power: they perceive all of time and can interact with any moment in time, thus "arranging history" as we might arrange furniture in a room. This same type of paradox is what allows them to insert prophecies into the past and shape the Bajoran civilization, as well as the path of the Emissary.

The Prophets employ a light touch for the most part: guiding and suggesting, rather than manipulating and controling. The Pagh-wraiths never get the development they would need to be convincing, but we can infer that their goal is to take control of the Celestial temple and manipulate time in a more tyrannical manner.

And really, WHY did the Prophets need to do that?

Simply because if they hadn't, he wouldn't have been born. This development is certainly not necessary in the strong sense, but it does bring into tighter focus the enigmatic and paradoxical nature of the Prophets' relationship with linear time.

And in the end, Sisko could just have been a normal human and nothing in the story would be different. So, what's the point of this whole reveal?

Bringing the enigma of the prophets into tighter focus is one reason, but there are others. This reveal establishes a more intimate relationship between Sisko and the Prophets, as expressed in his conversations with his mother Sarah in his visions (rather than with a random assortment of other characters, as had previously been the case).

Even if they wanted to have Sisko join the Prophets in the end, it still could just as well have happened without the whole arranged birth thing. If the Prophets like someone, if they have chosen someone and decided to 'resurrect' him and have him live with them, they could have done it whether his birth had been arranged or not.

Maybe, but the retcon prepares the viewer for this eventuality to the point where no explanation at all is required in WYLB. Since the intimate connection with the Prophets has already been established, there is no need to speak in terms of "resurrection" or "divine intervention" at this stage: Sisko just returns to his mother in the Celestial Temple.

Now, I don't doubt that this could have been accomplished in other ways, but I disagree that the retcon has no impact at all: it sets the stage for Sisko's final transfiguration. The stage could have been set in a different manner, but something needed to be done to foreshadow this development.

It's not like he was physically any different. And it's not like they have more of a claim over him and more of a right to do what they want with him because they arranged his birth. At least I don't think so.

The Prophets are intended to be enigmatic, so I prefer that no precise explanation is provided. However, I think we can infer that Sisko's "pagh," "spirit" or "soul" is half-Prophet, whereas his physical body is human.

Now we learn that Sisko's fate had always been decided for him, even before his birth. What is that supposed to add to the story? It only takes away something.

On this point I strongly disagree. Sisko's arranged birth does not eliminate his free will: the choices he has made throughout his life are his own. He didn't control the circumstances of his birth, but then nobody does: he controled the rest of his life, however. The nature of this "paradox" is explored in Destiny: the prophecy is fulfilled precisely because Sisko exercises his judgement and does what he thinks is best, rather than attempting to conform his actions to the prophecy.

This type of apparent contradiction is common in theology: for example, christian theology affirms both the omniscience of God and the freewill of human beings. Sisko's choices are his own; the Prophets, however, can perceive all of his actions and choices unfolding simultaneously from outside of linear time.

I don't mean creepy as "mysterious". I mean creepy as "disturbing and disgusting". Unless I missed something, Sarah did not want to marry Joseph, to conceive and give birth to Ben. Or else there would never have been any need for the Prophets to arrange the birth, would it?

This point I am more inclined to agree with: we are told that Sarah didn't choose Joseph, but that the Prophets did. And, to the extent that we are to believe that they enslaved Sarah against her will, that element of the story is a mistake. However, is it necessary to interpret these events in such a somber manner?

The only other time we have seen the Prophets inhabit a sentient being that I can recall is in The Reckoning, and this is consensual: Kira is a willing vessel for the Prophet that possessed her. I think it's possible that Sarah was also willing to allow a Prophet to inhabit her body and to guide her, presumably because they made her feel the necessity of their actions. Sarah still would not have chosen Joseph (the Prophets did), but that doesn't mean she was possessed against her will.

Once the Prophet departed, she could not continue the relationship as her own heart wasn't in it.

Certainly this experience caused Joseph a great deal of pain, but it also brought him joy (he loved her) and a beloved son (Ben). There is also plenty of resonance between this... errr... unorthodox union and interactions between human beings and divine powers in actual religions. For example, I can only imagine what the biblical Joseph felt when he learned that the holy spirit had impregnated his bride-to-be and that he would never be able to have sex with her. Creepy? Sure, depending on your point of view, but one of the goals of this retcon was to deepen the resonance between the Emissary storyline and existing theology.

I can understand, however, not really wanting these ties to be strengthened in the first place. It is a somewhat heavy-handed approach (as opposed to the more subtle approach of Destiny and Rapture, which I admit I prefer).

If the idea behind this had been to portray the Prophets as manipulative assholes who treat humans as bodies to be used to their ends, then it was a good idea. But since season 7 attempted to portray the Prophets as good and their antagonists as evil, it really was a very bad idea.

We can infer that the Pagh Wraiths intend to use their non-linear status to dominate Bajor and the Alpha Quadrant, which they can reasonably accomplish by manipulating history from within the Celestial Temple. If Sisko's birth is necessary to prevent this from occuring, is the sorrow of one man and one woman too great a price to pay?

This echoes back to the moral dilemma of In the Pale Moonlight: is the life of one criminal, one Romulan senator and the self-respect of one Starfleet captain too high a price to pay for the safety of the entire alpha quadrant? I think I could live with it. Was it necessary for Joseph and Sarah to suffer in order for the Emissary to be born and the Pagh Wraith defeated? Perhaps, and I think I could live with it, in their place.

I will say this, however: the nature of this moral problem should have been dealt with more explicitly. I would have liked to have seen Sisko question the prophets' motives more openly, particularly as they related to his father and human mother.

 

[DevilEyes]

Precisely because the non-linear nature of the prophets' existence is what makes them an interesting sci-fi concept. As you suggest, the "chicken and the egg" problem is inherent to the idea of the Prophets from the beginning, and it's what gives them their power: they perceive all of time and can interact with any moment in time, thus "arranging history" as we might arrange furniture in a room. This same type of paradox is what allows them to insert prophecies into the past and shape the Bajoran civilization, as well as the path of the Emissary.

The Prophets employ a light touch for the most: guiding and suggesting, rather than manipulating and controling. The Pagh-wraiths never get the development they would need to be convincing, but we can infer that their goal is to take control of the Celestial temple and manipulate time in a more tyrannical manner.

That would be true, except that the Prophets arranging Sisko's birth certainly belongs into the manipulating and controlling territory.

Simply because if they hadn't, he wouldn't have been born.

Only because the writers retconned it that way in season 7. The show would have been just fine without it.

This development is certainly not necessary in the strong sense, but it does bring into tighter focus the enigmatic and paradoxical nature of the Prophets' relationship with linear time.

There are plenty of ways that the Prophets' relationship with linear time could have been explored. I don't see it as a strong enough reason for such a massive retcon of Sisko's personal history.

The Prophets are intended to be enigmatic, so I prefer that no precise explanation is provided. However, I think we can infer that Sisko's "pagh," "spirit" or "soul" is half-Prophet, whereas his physical body is human.

Yet he never seemed to be any different than any other humans for that, did he? He wasn't even the only one who was able to communicate with the Prophets. He always seemed completely human.

Certainly this experience caused Joseph a great deal of pain, but it also brought him joy (he loved her) and a beloved son (Ben). There is also plenty of resonance between this... errr... unorthodox union and interactions between human beings and divine powers in actual religions. For example, I can only imagine what the biblical Joseph felt when he learned that the holy spirit had impregnated his bride-to-be and that he would never be able to have sex with her.

I don't remember the part in the Bible where Joseph found out he could never have sex with his wife. Because, in the Bible, it never happened. There is absolutely no suggestion that Joseph and Mary weren't having sex like any husband and wife, or that they didn't have a bunch of children, like most married couples did at the time. And why wouldn't they? What possible reason would anyone have for demanding that Mary remained a virgin all her life? In fact, on one of the very rare occasions when Jesus' family is mentioned in the Gospels after his childhood, his brothers are mentioned. The whole "Virgin Mary" idea is a later church dogma, a product of a the virgin/whore mentality that also gave birth to pope Gregory I's completely unfounded 6th century "retcon" of Mary Magdalene as a prostitute.

As for Sisko's birth being arranged, it was blatantly obvious that it was meant to parallel the theory about Jesus in the Christian theology. I guess I'm just not the right person to be impressed by that, since - and I'm sorry if this is going to offend anyone - I think of that story is something made up by Jesus's disciples in order to impress the masses they were trying to convert, long after he was dead. It's notable that the Gospels don't even infer that Jesus ever claimed to be literally the son of God rather than the son of Joseph - in fact, nobody is portrayed as claiming that during his life. Only two of the four gospels feature the story of Jesus' miraculous birth, while the other two do not (unlike the resurrection, which is a crucial event in every one of them, including the apocryphal ones), and those that do - Matthew and Luke - never make clear how they know this in the first place - they don't say that Jesus or his mother or his father told them, for instance; we're just supposed to accept that they know it. Matthew also starts his Gospel not with the story of the birth, but with a long account of Jesus's family tree - on his father's side (Joseph, that is), making him a descendant of King David... Kind of ironic? Anyway, I might not be exactly a religious person, but I know some people who consider themselves Christians, but who also believe that Jesus was 100% a man and that there was no miraculous birth; they prefer to think of him as this great guy who had some wonderful ideas and believed in them so strongly he was willing to sacrifice his life for his faith, rather than someone who was part-God and knew right from the start that he was more than just a man and knew for certain that he had always a special destiny to fulfill.

 

[flemm]

As for Sisko's birth being arranged, it was blatantly obvious that it was meant to parallel the theory about Jesus in the Christian theology.

This is an exaggeration, I think. In some ways I would compare this to concluding that the occupation of Bajor is meant to be a parallel to the Holocaust, the Cardassians are Nazis, the Bajorans are Jews, etc. Those connections are possible, but those are not the only possible connections, and the parallel is not exact. The Bajoran political situation is meant to resonate with historical events such as the Holocaust and the occupation of France during WW2, but we cannot reduce this resonance to a direct allegory of historical events.

Similarly, Sisko's birth is meant to resonate with Christian theology, but the parallel is not exact. For this reason, it does not depend on any single interpretation of the Bible, of Jesus' life, etc. On the contrary, Sisko's experience resonates to a certain degree with numerous possible interpretations, and is not perfectly analagous to any single one.

With this in mind, the exact interpretation that one prefers of the biblical narrative is not especially important to evaluating the revelation concerning Sisko's birth.

Sisko's "arranged" birth is in fact open to a variety of interpretations, some of which we have already brought up in this discussion: is he "just a man" or something more? We don't really know, just as there is room for multiple interpretations in the case of Jesus and presumably other religious figures such as Buddha, etc.

Since the prophets from the beginning have allowed DS9 to deal with some religious questions in a sci-fi setting, I don't really have a problem with the show addressing the theme of the incarnation of God/the gods in human form. Why draw the line here? It certainly wasn't necessary, but so what? It's just another set of questions that the show brings into its narrative, and some of those questions are interesting and worth asking.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

DevilEyes is correct in that the idea of Mary never being able to have children is held by certain branches of the Christian faith, but not by others. I would also add, from my own knowledge of the faith, that unlike the incident portrayed in DS9 with the Prophets--consent was explicitly asked and given with no mental invasion whatsoever, in Mary's case. (Depicted specifically in the Gospel of Luke.) This favor was not afforded to Sarah, to be freely asked AND to go into everything with her mind intact, the whole time. So yeah, this plotline creeps me out...because while the Prophets followed a certain archetype, they missed a critical element. Maybe it was lack of understanding rather than malice, but it's still creepy and wrong.

 

[flemm]

DevilEyes is correct in that the idea of Mary never being able to have children is held by certain branches of the Christian faith, but not by others.

Agreed, but that doesn't contradict the point that I was making above, which was that certain interpretations of the biblical narrative can also seem rather disturbing and strange, depending on one's point of view.

I would also add, from my own knowledge of the faith, that unlike the incident portrayed in DS9 with the Prophets--consent was explicitly asked and given with no mental invasion whatsoever, in Mary's case. (Depicted specifically in the Gospel of Luke.) This favor was not afforded to Sarah, to be freely asked AND to go into everything with her mind intact, the whole time.

I think the question of whether or not this choice was afforded to Sarah is open to debate and interpretation. The fact that Joseph was not Sarah's choice does not mean she was the Prophet's unwilling slave, or that she was compelled by force to submit to the Prophet's will. It might simply mean that she was willing to accept the Prophet's guidance because she was convinced it was for the best.

Similarly, Kira agrees to be the prophet's vessel in The Reckoning: Kira is no longer in control, but she is not being violated because she consented to allow her physical form to embody the Prophets in this manner.

I would prefer that Sarah's consent had been explicitly stated, but I don't think the opposite is clearly stated either, at least that was not my impression.

 

[Bones2]

Honor Among Thieves and Nor the Battle to the Strong are underappreciated in my view.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

Kira accepted the Prophet's control, yes, as a member of the Bajoran faith. What incentive would Sarah have had to willingly give up her self-will, though. as a human who would never visit Bajor in her time? Unless consent was clearly stated--I'm sorry, but the reaction Sarah had upon release can only support a case of nonconsensual possession. (If she'd been on board with it, wholeheartedly, she would have taken her situation upon release as the will of the Prophets, much as Kira calmly accepted her own situation afterwards.)

 

[Stone_Cold_Sisko]

As far as Dominion War based episodes, these two in the final 10 episode arc of DS9 were pretty fantastic:

The Changing Face of Evil
Tacking into the Wind