• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

When Do You Want To See Burnham Become The STD Captain?

So, Kirk's stealing of a starship, diverting course to save Spock's life over a colony in distress, among others, is redeemable, but Burnham's mutiny is beyond saving?

I don't understand this point of view.
Hey I don't write the regulations. Think about what Burnham did. She physically disabled her Captain. She attempted to fire first. She assumed command only because she mutinied. Mutiny on a ship, a confined vessel on the brink of war, war that Michael personally supplied the martyr for, put her in an untenable situation. Did Michael follow Starfleets's direction or Sarek's advice? Was it personal? Does any of that matter. If she wanted to act alone that would've been her choice but she broke rank and was given another chance by Georgiou. That failed and resulted in Georgiou's death. She accepted a sentence and is being given another chance. Michael is hardly suffering consequences beyond second chances. She just might not be Starfleet, command material.
 
Hey I don't write the regulations. Think about what Burnham did. She physically disabled her Captain. She attempted to fire first. She assumed command only because she mutinied. Mutiny on a ship, a confined vessel on the brink of war, war that Michael personally supplied the martyr for, put her in an untenable situation. Did Michael follow Starfleets's direction or Sarek's advice? Was it personal? Does any of that matter. If she wanted to act alone that would've been her choice but she broke rank and was given another chance by Georgiou. That failed and resulted in Georgiou's death. She accepted a sentence and is being given another chance. Michael is hardly suffering consequences beyond second chances. She just might not be Starfleet, command material.
She is Starfleet command material. She just isn't flawless like all the other captains...oh wait.
 
I perfectly understand the feeling that her record may be an obstacle or the fear that the writers may make it happen to soon or too easily, but this idea going around that she cannot ever become a captain under any circumstances is just bizarre. This is *Starfleet*. They've forgiven worse than this. Several times over.
 
I perfectly understand the feeling that her record may be an obstacle or the fear that the writers may make it happen to soon or too easily, but this idea going around that she cannot ever become a captain under any circumstances is just bizarre. This is *Starfleet*. They've forgiven worse than this. Several times over.
Yes of course, if it is written anything can happen.
 
I would choose that. She can serve as a specialist and attain her redemption without the reward of Captaincy.
O9GfCo6.jpg
 
Starfleet doesn't have the death penalty, except for General Order 7. And that has nothing to do with a mutiny.

Also, how often did Kirk ignore the Admiralty? Insubordination? Apparently not as bad as mutiny.

If Kirk committed mutiny, this discussion would be how unfair Starfleet was to him.
Some have interpreted the line as inferring that Spock would pay for it with his life.

T'Pau says "Live long and Prosper, Spock"
Spock says "I shall do neither, for I have killed my captain, and my friend."

I don't see a reason for Burnham to be made Captain. I do see her having to take over command of the Discovery at some point, in a crisis, but not permanently.

She was stripped of rank. She's no longer an officer. And whether or not it was deserved, she was sentenced to life in prison. Let's say she saves earth(or maybe Antos IV) and the President of the Federation pardons her, or whoever has that power. Do they give her her rank back? And then some?

If Spock really had killed Kirk, even though it was in a sanctioned duel, would he still be in Starfleet? He didn't seem to think so.

Also, she's the main character of a show that was promoted as specifically not focusing on the Captain. And she wasn't cast to play a captain. The only way I see it happening is in the final episode to feature Burnham showing her in command of her own ship in the closing shot, and showing her journey complete, from that first conversation when we were introduced to Burnham. A story concluded.

Other than that, I have a very difficult time picturing "The adventures of Captain Burnham."
 
Painfully obvious that Lorca will be dead or imprisoned soon. They're setting him up as an irredeemable war monger, in an attempt to elevate Burnham as the protagonist. Plus, I doubt these producers want another Straight White Male lead, unless he's a villain who gets overpowered by the 'heroes.'

No doubt Burnham will be placed in a position where she will have to mutiny again and take charge.

The ship will need a new Captain, and episode 5 proved that it probably won't be Saru, he's too green to command, and didn't have the training that Burnham The Great did.

She would be the youngest Captain lead in the prime franchise (only 30 according to her screen bio) if they push this. Younger than Prime Captain Kirk.

Do you want Burnham as the Captain on STD next season? I'm skeptical Sonequa has the presence to pull it off without coming off as unlikeable (see her giving orders scenes in the premiere), but it seems the only direction to go if this show wants to continue to be centred around her character.

No captains chair for her. She has not earned it. I dont see Lorca going anywhere anytime soon and that's fine with me.

She rebelled against her captain and handed a life sentence.
 
For all who think Burnham should be captain, can you think of any analogous situation (fictional or otherwise) where a traitor and mutineer could plausibly be reinstated to military service and elevated to a command position?

To use a real-life example, can you imagine the US Army reinstating Bowe Bergdahl, promoting him, and placing him in command of troops in the field? It's absurd; and his crimes were minor compared to Burnham's.

The only thing that could put Burnham in the command chair is terrible screenwriting, which means it will probably happen.
 
For all who think Burnham should be captain, can you think of any analogous situation (fictional or otherwise) where a traitor and mutineer could plausibly be reinstated to military service and elevated to a command position?

To use a real-life example, can you imagine the US Army reinstating Bowe Bergdahl, promoting him, and placing him in command of troops in the field? It's absurd; and his crimes were minor compared to Burnham's.

The only thing that could put Burnham in the command chair is terrible screenwriting, which means it will probably happen.

Spock, Data, Chakotay, etc, etc. Starfleet isn't the US military.
 
Spock killed kirk in Amok Time.

Yeah, but that was part of an official ceremony that was recognized under Vulcan law and tradition (and therefore must be recognized under Federation law as well). If Spock had killed Kirk, there'd be nothing that the Federation or Starfleet could do to punish him.

As for Burnham: Perhaps Spock said "Absolutely no record" of mutiny because he was reluctant to admit that it was his adopted sister who committed one?
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top