What's your take on Section 31?

[Rojixus]

Section 31 was a terrible idea just to make the Star Trek universe more "dark" and leave the optimistic future behind.

If by "dark" you mean realistic, then I agree.

I didn't find Section 31 realistic, I found it absurd that a regular bureaucratic organization like Starfleet, that already had special operations divisions and Starfleet Intelligence, would need a group that was so secret that no one even knew of its existence.

military, or quasi-military organizations just don't work that way. In the Romulan Empire, folks know of the existence of the Tal Shiar. In the Cardassian Empire, folks know of the Obsidian Order.

the stuff we see Sec. 31 doing would be the same stuff Starfleet Intelligence could be doing. They didn't need to introduce some new comic book-esque group into the Trekverse.

That was exactly the point I was trying to make earlier. Section 31 is redundant at best; we already have Starfleet Intelligence that does what Section 31 is purported to do. All Section 31 is good for is making the Federation "darker and edgier" and we already had rogue admirals that served that purpose (to much greater effect in my opinion).

Section 31 is just some writer's poor attempt at creating a Federation equivalent of the Tal'Shiar or the Obsidian Order. What makes this a poor attempt is that S31 is so secret that apparently not even the Federation government is aware of its existence! This makes Section 31 look like the paranoid, deluded extremist cabal they truly are.

If you're trying to make the Federation more morally dubious, don't make some secret unsanctioned conspiracy that no one knows about and try to peg the Federation government as morally equivalent to the Romulans or Cardassians.

 

[Mark 2000]

Section 31 stemmed from a sudden bought on DS9 to give everyone a clandestine service. It started with the Talshiar in TNG's "Face of the Enemy", and it made sense that the Romulans had some kind of Stasi/KGB analog. I though it was childish how Troi was supposed to be part of this dark, secretive service who's name kept being brought up enough times that you could make a drinking game out of it. But whatever.

Then there was the Obsidian Order, and then Section 31. And then you had this whole thing playing out of spy vs spy. There is a reason why there's so many comedies about spy work - it's because it's childish. It's a bunch of children tit for tatting each other at best and overthrowing legit governments it doesn't like (Iran? Chile?) at worst. Even James Bond is campy. The only serious spy movie I can think of is the Peace Maker and that sucked. And 24 was serious, but just silly anyway.

I'd like to think the Federation is too good for the first and completely ethically about the second. That may no be "realistic", but I don't watch a semi-utopian show about making friends with bi-pedal aliens for the realism. I rather that be left out.

 

[Paradon]

...otherwise, go date a crossed dresser. Maybe the find them more attractive! [laugh]

Psychiatrists often can help with feelings of homophobia and other mental disorders.

Hmmm.... Maybe you prefer to date a crossed dresser and gay men. [chuckle]

I have nothing against gay people. But, let's face it! Most women find men who act like men more attractive.

Part of having a good relationship is trust, and also good dialogue and opened communication. No one will trust you if you spy on them. Spying on people say that you don't really trust that them and that you are somehow superior. Part of achieving an everlasting is trust and not hurting and killing people. You earn country's trust by starting a war and killing their people and spying on them. We need to learn to stay out of foreign affairs that doesnt' concern us. Those people don't need us to tell them what to do and how to behave like they can't do nothing right. Think of how insulting that is.

 

[sonak]

...otherwise, go date a crossed dresser. Maybe the find them more attractive! [laugh]

Psychiatrists often can help with feelings of homophobia and other mental disorders.

Hmmm.... Maybe you prefer to date a crossed dresser and gay men. [chuckle]

I have nothing against gay people. But, let's face it! Most women find men who act like men more attractive.

Part of having a good relationship is trust, and also good dialogue and opened communication. No one will trust you if you spy on them. Spying on people say that you don't really trust that them and that you are somehow superior. Part of achieving an everlasting is trust and not hurting and killing people. You earn country's trust by starting a war and killing their people and spying on them. We need to learn to stay out of foreign affairs that doesnt' concern us. Those people don't need us to tell them what to do and how to behave like they can't do nothing right. Think of how insulting that is.

it's hard to draw clear lines these days and say what does or does not concern various countries in foreign affairs these days, the world is much more inter-connected, and problems that arise in one region may not stay there.

Your worldview as to how nations or people act is very idealistic, but it's not really the case that if you act "open, friendly, and trusting" to people, that they will reciprocate.

Sadly, many will take this as a projection of weakness and vulnerability. It's easier to make peace from a position of strength than weakness.

 

[nightwind1]

Section 31 makes the Great Bird of the Galaxy cry...

 

[Mr Silver]

I see Section 31 as an organisation that reasoned that they did what the Federation couldn't. Whilst the Federation don't condone the acts of Section 31, they don't exactly do much to stop them. This is probably down to the fact that 31 have got results by the most efficient (although not "cleanest") means necessary. As a result the Federation have turned a blind eye on a couple of occasions, perhaps citing the greater good and all that.

Its likely many people in the Federaton's upper echelon are against Section 31 and wish to apprehend them. But, there are probably many people of influence who support the group or are even members keeping the heat of the organisation.

It's when Section 31 go too far that people turn their back on them. Whilst the Founders were considered the enemy, nobody wanted them eliminated, but Section 31 chose to ignore the morals of the Federation and do what they thought was best for securing victory.

 

[Greg Cox]

GR's original idea was optimistic. Section 31 is the exact opposite. Section 31 makes GR sad.

I think GR is past caring . . . .

 

[Paradon]

Psychiatrists often can help with feelings of homophobia and other mental disorders.

Hmmm.... Maybe you prefer to date a crossed dresser and gay men. [chuckle]

I have nothing against gay people. But, let's face it! Most women find men who act like men more attractive.

Part of having a good relationship is trust, and also good dialogue and opened communication. No one will trust you if you spy on them. Spying on people say that you don't really trust that them and that you are somehow superior. Part of achieving an everlasting is trust and not hurting and killing people. You earn country's trust by starting a war and killing their people and spying on them. We need to learn to stay out of foreign affairs that doesnt' concern us. Those people don't need us to tell them what to do and how to behave like they can't do nothing right. Think of how insulting that is.

it's hard to draw clear lines these days and say what does or does not concern various countries in foreign affairs these days, the world is much more inter-connected, and problems that arise in one region may not stay there.

Your worldview as to how nations or people act is very idealistic, but it's not really the case that if you act "open, friendly, and trusting" to people, that they will reciprocate.

Sadly, many will take this as a projection of weakness and vulnerability. It's easier to make peace from a position of strength than weakness.

So you act tough and pissed everyone off and spend all the tax money on foreign wars and affairs, and while you are getting weaker, your enemies is looking for a way to destroy you. What if they plan it right when your country is weak (due to too much spending and inflation), and somehow manage to detonate a nuke in the U.S. as a result? Tsungsu said no war ever benefited a nation. This is why. Do you think it matters to the fanatics across the ages of the odds against the improbability? If we remain peaceful, our country is only going to be get stronger. War and high taxes cause high inflation rate and weak monetary value. And The more you bully people around, showing off how strong you are and inflicting pain and suffering on them, the more they want to retaliate against you and it won't matter to them if they are going to suceed. Freedom and liberty is the mian driven force behind human civilizations. Nobody likes to be bullied. Most people would rather die than to live like caged animals. Things aren't going to get better until someone starts trusting somebody.

 

[plynch]

GR's original idea was optimistic. Section 31 is the exact opposite. Section 31 makes GR sad.

But don't the good, ethical starfleet guys defeat evil section 31? Optimism vindicated.

 

[Courat]

Do you think they were a necessary evil? Or an abomination of the Federation?

Section 31?? Sounds like a law

 

[sonak]

Hmmm.... Maybe you prefer to date a crossed dresser and gay men. [chuckle]

I have nothing against gay people. But, let's face it! Most women find men who act like men more attractive.

Part of having a good relationship is trust, and also good dialogue and opened communication. No one will trust you if you spy on them. Spying on people say that you don't really trust that them and that you are somehow superior. Part of achieving an everlasting is trust and not hurting and killing people. You earn country's trust by starting a war and killing their people and spying on them. We need to learn to stay out of foreign affairs that doesnt' concern us. Those people don't need us to tell them what to do and how to behave like they can't do nothing right. Think of how insulting that is.

it's hard to draw clear lines these days and say what does or does not concern various countries in foreign affairs these days, the world is much more inter-connected, and problems that arise in one region may not stay there.

Your worldview as to how nations or people act is very idealistic, but it's not really the case that if you act "open, friendly, and trusting" to people, that they will reciprocate.

Sadly, many will take this as a projection of weakness and vulnerability. It's easier to make peace from a position of strength than weakness.

So you act tough and pissed everyone off and spend all the tax money on foreign wars and affairs, and while you are getting weaker, your enemies is looking for a way to destroy you. What if they plan it right when your country is weak (due to too much spending and inflation), and somehow manage to detonate a nuke in the U.S. as a result? Tsungsu said no war ever benefited a nation. This is why. Do you think it matters to the fanatics across the ages of the odds against the improbability? If we remain peaceful, our country is only going to be get stronger. War and high taxes cause high inflation rate and weak monetary value. And The more you bully people around, showing off how strong you are and inflicting pain and suffering on them, the more they want to retaliate against you and it won't matter to them if they are going to suceed. Freedom and liberty is the mian driven force behind human civilizations. Nobody likes to be bullied. Most people would rather die than to live like caged animals. Things aren't going to get better until someone starts trusting somebody.

if you think "no war has ever benefited a nation" and that "freedom and liberty" are the driving forces behind civilization than I'm not sure we're arguing about the same planet here.

But try out your "peace and trust are the way" philosophy. Let me know how far that gets you.

 

[Mark 2000]

if you think "no war has ever benefited a nation" and that "freedom and liberty" are the driving forces behind civilization than I'm not sure we're arguing about the same planet here.

But try out your "peace and trust are the way" philosophy. Let me know how far that gets you.

Oh, Sonak. See, you are an imperialist. I'll, of course, ask you to back up your jingoistic statement with a list of wars that you think were more than selfishness, petty land grabs, racism, or blood fueds and if you reply at all you'll say "World War II". Check and mate!

 

[BillJ]

if you think "no war has ever benefited a nation" and that "freedom and liberty" are the driving forces behind civilization than I'm not sure we're arguing about the same planet here.

But try out your "peace and trust are the way" philosophy. Let me know how far that gets you.

Oh, Sonak. See, you are an imperialist. I'll, of course, ask you to back up your jingoistic statement with a list of wars that you think were more than selfishness, petty land grabs, racism, or blood fueds and if you reply at all you'll say "World War II". Check and mate!

This makes no sense. Of course wars are always started because of the issues listed above. But not every entrant in a conflict does so because of the reasons listed above. Unless you count self-preservation as selfishness.

 

[Mark 2000]

Yes, but peace begets peace and it's foolish to say that war is not only inevitable but beneficial. If you walk around with a stick in your hand you're going to wind up in a fight. The very idea that we fight because others force us to when we have a yearly military budget bigger than nasa's 50 years of funding is ludicrous.

 

[BillJ]

Yes, but peace begets peace and it's foolish to say that war is not only inevitable but beneficial. If you walk around with a stick in your hand you're going to wind up in a fight.

Not always true. Sometimes the presence of the stick is all you need to prevent trouble.

Sometimes war is inevitable and beneficial. Massive ideological divides drove the South to succession. In Lincoln's mind a divided state served no ones best interest. The endgame was a united country and a the ending of slavery in the U.S. and it's territories. It's in the eye-of-the-beholder whether or not it was beneficial in the long run. In my personal opinion, the Civil War was inevitable and it was beneficial.

War should never be taken lightly and should never be the first option. But there are times the divide is just to wide to be bridged and you should always have the big stick prepared.

 

[sonak]

Yes, but peace begets peace and it's foolish to say that war is not only inevitable but beneficial. If you walk around with a stick in your hand you're going to wind up in a fight.

Not always true. Sometimes the presence of the stick is all you need to prevent trouble.

Sometimes war is inevitable and beneficial. Massive ideological divides drove the South to succession. In Lincoln's mind a divided state served no ones best interest. The endgame was a united country and a the ending of slavery in the U.S. and it's territories. It's in the eye-of-the-beholder whether or not it was beneficial in the long run. In my personal opinion, the Civil War was inevitable and it was beneficial.

War should never be taken lightly and should never be the first option. But there are times the divide is just to wide to be bridged and you should always have the big stick prepared.

this was well said. Believing in security and preparedness doesn't make one a "hawk," an "imperialist," or some other boogeyman term. Deterrence is often a better way to achieve peace than a treaty.


And Mark 2000 moved the goalposts on the quote-the quote was "war has never benefited a nation," not about what the causes of war are. This is pretty obviously not true, as BillJ's example of the American Civil War shows.

I happen to have a realistic view of human nature, that's all. But Mark2000 loves the word "imperialist" so much, I think he should start a band with that name.

 

[Paradon]

You believe that there are races that are purely evil, that they cannot be reasoned and are beyond redemption. Like Species 8472, who telepathically said to Kes that they would purge all life from our galaxy. That's not realistic. There are no country and race that are pure evil. There are diversifty of opinions and people in other countries just as western countries. Most people in other countries are just like you and I. What you've seen on TV isn't true? Most people from the Middle East don't act like how they are portrayed on television. I don't think anyone does... Let's threaten to destroyed their cultures and countries, that would get their attention... Well, that would get their attention, but not in a way you had hope. I'm surprised Species 8472 hasn't tried to destroy the Federation already after Janeway helped the Borg design a weapon that could annialate their species. The Borg would have if their goal wasn't to assimilate them to add their perfection.

 

[Mark 2000]

Not always true. Sometimes the presence of the stick is all you need to prevent trouble.

Like when? Besides the Cold War - which was in its own way devastating and not particularly cold - did having weapons act as a deterrent? I mean, you can say any number of platitudes that sound good, but they don't work. They don't exist. People who have guns - whether in the home or on military scale - tend to want to use them. History does show that pretty clearly.

Massive ideological divides drove the South to succession. In Lincoln's mind a divided state served no ones best interest. The endgame was a united country and a the ending of slavery in the U.S. and it's territories. It's in the eye-of-the-beholder whether or not it was beneficial in the long run. In my personal opinion, the Civil War was inevitable and it was beneficial.

I do think the Civil War is debatable and mainly comes down to two sides who's cultural differences made them just want to kill each other with slavery as peripheral issues, but I'll hand it to you. And I'll also hand you a number of Revolutionary wars including our own. But I think Egypt and India prove that there are other means to freedom from tyranny. But that's still a small handful compared to the vast number of conflicts that even the United States has been in the last century - which has been in a constant state of military aggression in one way or another. Statistically your argument doesn't hold up.

Believing in security and preparedness doesn't make one a "hawk," an "imperialist," or some other boogeyman term.

You can frame it that way, but taking a look at how our weapons are used you would be completely wrong. You think you're being realistic, but it's you who's the idealist - thinking that trillions of dollars of weapons are just for defense.

 

[Paradon]

Sonak. You think that their are a lot of things that other non-western countries don't understand about us, why we do this and that, wishing that you could knock some sense into them. I don't think they have to...there are things that you don't understand about them that you find terrifying or you don't like. But I think we could come together and share things that we do understand and like doing...things that we have in common. Maybe dancing and eating traditional food from of their cultures and sharing stories about their families and life in general and if you take the time to look, it's all pretty much the same across cultures. Focus on the things that we do agree on and like doing together...enjoy it together. As the ancient Celtics said: "never give a sword to man that can't dance".

You can't base a relationship of deciets, lies and fear! It will never work out. Not in a million years!

 

[sonak]

Sonak. You think that their are a lot of things that other non-western countries don't understand about us, why we do this and that, wishing that you could knock some sense into them. I don't think they have to...there are things that you don't understand about them that you find terrifying or you don't like. But I think we could come together and share things that we do understand and like doing...things that we have in common. Maybe dancing and eating traditional food from of their cultures and sharing stories about their families and life in general and if you take the time to look, it's all pretty much the same across cultures. Focus on the things that we do agree on and like doing together...enjoy it together. As the ancient Celtics said: "never give a sword to man that can't dance".

You can't base a relationship of deciets, lies and fear! It will never work out. Not in a million years!

I think we're arguing past each other here, I don't know why this is getting framed as a cultural issue here of "non-Western vs. Western." Two of the most devastating wars in history pitted Western countries against other Western countries. I don't remember writing anything about certain races being pure evil either, as that would be ridiculous. I do think however, that there's a divide between liberal democracies and authoritarian regimes.

Dialogue and cultural exchanges can be good ideas, but it's always nice to have something to fall back on.