Who's side were you on in Hippocratic Oath

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Re: Whose side were you on in Hippocratic Oath

^ What about New Sydney? The colony where Ezri's family lived? They weren't Federation members, and they seemed all right.

I don't agree about the Federation, BTW, They don't think everyone wants to join. In fact they have very strict requirements, and probably turn down prospective applicants regularly (we saw them do it at least once).

I certainly don't think this episode is any indication, one way or another. We actually have no idea how the Federation reacted. They might have - and since Bashir wasn't thrown in prison or anything, probably did - let Bashir off the hook, reasoning that he was under threat for his life and thus wasn't responsible. That's how I would expect them to react. As has already been pointed out, the war hadn't happened yet. So I guess I was wrong about aid and comfort to the enemy and all that.

 

[mrs260]

Re: Whose side were you on in Hippocratic Oath

I tend not to remember Season 7 episodes, especially Ezri-focussed ones. (And besides... wasn't Ezri's family involved with the mob? I've only seen the episode once, but I seem to remember something along those lines.)

If the Federation practiced what it preached, they would have applauded Bashir's efforts to help the Jem'Hadar. You're right that we can't know from this episode how they reacted, of course.

BTW, your argument against "they think everyone wants to join" doesn't actually address the idea that they think everyone wants to join. It just notes that they don't let everyone join.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Re: Whose side were you on in Hippocratic Oath

mrs260 said:And besides... wasn't Ezri's family involved with the mob?

No.

If the Federation practiced what it preached, they would have applauded Bashir's efforts to help the Jem'Hadar. You're right that we can't know from this episode how they reacted, of course.

Exactly. Maybe they did! And as I said, Bashir wasn't imprisoned, so they must have let him off.

BTW, your argument against "they think everyone wants to join" doesn't actually address the idea that they think everyone wants to join. It just notes that they don't let everyone join.

If they wanted everyone to join, then by definition they would let everyone in. The fact that there are worlds that aren't allowed in, proves that the UFP doesn't want everyone to join.

 

[Kookalaka]

Re: Whose side were you on in Hippocratic Oath

I would want to believe, as Bashir does, that freeing the Jem'Hadar would cause their species/society/culture to evolve beyond their inital genetic destiny as the Dominion's slave army.

And I do believe that Bashir was right to try to find the cure and give that group of Jem'Hadar, who were seeking freedom, a chance to be free.... if things had been that simple. But O'Brian and Bashir were being held prisoner. The Jem'Hadar were not asking for help, they were demanding obedience under pain of death.

So, while I agree with the search for a cure and admire Bashir's determination to find it regardless of the circumstances.... I do have to agree with O'Brian. Escape first.

 

[mrs260]

Re: Whose side were you on in Hippocratic Oath

Babaganoosh said:

If they wanted everyone to join, then by definition they would let everyone in. The fact that there are worlds that aren't allowed in, proves that the UFP doesn't want everyone to join.

Again, that doesn't address what I said, which was, "They think everyone wants to join."

The only way I can think to rephrase that is, "They believe that all non-member planets wish to become member planets." Basically, you're getting it backwards.

(Note: when you correctly parse what I'm saying, please do remember that I qualified it.)

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Re: Whose side were you on in Hippocratic Oath

^ How do you know what the UFP "thinks"? What matters is what they *do*.

 

[mrs260]

Re: Whose side were you on in Hippocratic Oath

Easy; I've thought about it and formed theories based on the text and subtext I've seen in canon.

What they do is act paternalistically towards certain species and hypocritically about some of their own professed ideals. In particular, I was thinking of the deliberate violation of others' space in order to force contact after being warned away.

One of the things I like about DS9 is that it has non-Federation characters who... aren't shy about expressing their outsider opinions of the Federation. And it has Federation characters who hold the Federation-ish traits I've mentioned, and Federation characters who do not. (Bashir and O'Brien are both pretty good on that score, to wrench this back from the tangent I started.)

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Re: Whose side were you on in Hippocratic Oath

mrs260 said: I was thinking of the deliberate violation of others' space in order to force contact after being warned away.

Explain....

 

[mrs260]

Re: Whose side were you on in Hippocratic Oath

For one thing, that episode of TOS where they encounter a warning buoy telling them to go away, that the species in question wants no contact. Kirk ordered the ship on anyway: he had been ordered by his superiors to make contact.

What I get from that is, "We're special; when they say they want everyone to go away they surely don't mean us! When they get to know us they'll be glad we violated their space against their express wishes."

Then there's the bright idea of violating Dominion space with a cloaked and heavily armed warship to convince the Dominion that they come in peace. (If they just talk to us they'll see that we're different! But they don't want to talk to us! So let's force them to talk to us!)

 

[CDP]

Re: Whose side were you on in Hippocratic Oath

mrs260 said:
For one thing, that episode of TOS where they encounter a warning buoy telling them to go away, that the species in question wants no contact. Kirk ordered the ship on anyway: he had been ordered by his superiors to make contact.

What I get from that is, "We're special; when they say they want everyone to go away they surely don't mean us! When they get to know us they'll be glad we violated their space against their express wishes."

Then there's the bright idea of violating Dominion space with a cloaked and heavily armed warship to convince the Dominion that they come in peace. (If they just talk to us they'll see that we're different! But they don't want to talk to us! So let's force them to talk to us!)

Agreed. If they'd kept out of the GQ after the jem Hadar poleaxed the odeysey then chances are that the DW wouldn't have happend, and they would have saved countless millions of lives.

That's pretty arrogant.

 

[new_mercury]

Truthfully I really don't know. Everytime I see that show I fail to come to a verdict. With Pale Moonlight for example I can see Sisko's motivation and why he felt like he did at the end when he says 'I can live with it'
but in 'Oath' I find myself unable to choose O'brien or Bashir.
I also felt the next episode should have dealt with their relationship and it's effects on it but I recall a book did that job.

 

[Apogeal Alpha01]

Re: Whose side were you on in Hippocratic Oath

CDP said:

mrs260 said:
For one thing, that episode of TOS where they encounter a warning buoy telling them to go away, that the species in question wants no contact. Kirk ordered the ship on anyway: he had been ordered by his superiors to make contact.

What I get from that is, "We're special; when they say they want everyone to go away they surely don't mean us! When they get to know us they'll be glad we violated their space against their express wishes."

Then there's the bright idea of violating Dominion space with a cloaked and heavily armed warship to convince the Dominion that they come in peace. (If they just talk to us they'll see that we're different! But they don't want to talk to us! So let's force them to talk to us!)

Agreed. If they'd kept out of the GQ after the jem Hadar poleaxed the odeysey then chances are that the DW wouldn't have happend, and they would have saved countless millions of lives.

That's pretty arrogant.

Even before the Odyssey incident, the Vorta mentioned that they had no idea what had begun. I think they were already plotting the takeover of the AQ.


I understand why some might think the Federation paternalistic. But consider that the Dominion okayed trade with Federation citizens and their friends, or trading partners at least. So why wouldn’t a curious group like the Federation want to confirm this overarching, mysterious and powerful concern named the Dominion? They’d have to know who this secretive, shadowy group is, that controls an entire quadrant of space. Rather than paternalism, concern for the unknown would be enough to drive them to discover who lies beyond the wormhole and the first systems near it. Anxiety would continue to grow, eventually turned to fear until that question is answered. It’s human nature. The Dominion wasn't a mysterious forest or, an intriguing mountain that could be left alone.

If you realized something or someone might be a serious danger, your survival instinct might lead you to avoid the danger, cowering in your home, or it could lead you to try to understand that danger and then do something to lessen the danger. They chose action in this case.

 

[CDP]

Re: Whose side were you on in Hippocratic Oath

I'm not so sure - they could have just said, OK, we'll leave you alone, have a nice eternity on the other side of the Galaxy, and then gone and heavily mined the entrance to the wormhole.

Also, Eris didn't tell them that it had begun until after the odessey was totaled.

 

[mrs260]

Re: Whose side were you on in Hippocratic Oath

They could have investigated less... aggressively.

If it had been an isolated incident, I probably wouldn't make anything of it--shadowy, possibly threatening power and all that. But there were numerous incidents of the Federation aggressively pursuing contact with obviously unaggressive people who'd already made it clear they wanted to be left alone. It's part of a pattern of considering themselves above other people's rules in other people's spheres of influence.