What was your job in the Air Force?
Why is there resistance to the idea of Starfleet being military?
- Thread starter The Wormhole
- Start date
- Status
Similar experience. Dad, mom, brother, brother-in-law, grandfather (both), and uncle, have all served in the military (most of them Navy). I spent the majority of my childhood stationed overseas (Italy, Japan, etc). So while I personally didn't serve, I'm very familiar with the military, its culture, and its functions. And while I see some similarities between Starfleet and the military (my idea of what a military is), I also see profound differences which make me think it isn't technically the military even though it is sometimes tasked with performing that function.
The main jargon and practices cited seem to be the use of ranks and uniforms and weapons which are neither exclusive to nor determinative of a military. And also the term "court-martial" which is fairly indicative but not overwhelmingly so.
Well pretty importantly it usually doesn't have that important attribute martial discipline. It hasn't allowed resignation in every single crisis, there have been a few exceptions, but it seems much, much more permissive to people resigning than a real or hypothetical military would be. A military would also be much more punitive, both directly and in terms of careers, toward people violating orders.
In the time of the original crew series/movies. When in all the time since then have Federation enemies referred to Starfleet ships, aside from the Defiant, as warships or battleships?
But when the Cardassians and Talarians were attacking Federation planets all the other endeavors weren't.
From Kirk, "We have shown the council historical proof that our [the Federation's] missions are peaceful."
Last edited:
But they're not. Mainly because the UCMJ doesn't exist anymore and most Federation members (not to mention Federation rivals) wouldn't honor it even if it did. The difference between military and civilian on the battlefield is not even something all milky way civilizations recognize. Instead they fall on a far more meaningful definition of "armed" vs. "not-armed" or "belligerent" vs. "peaceful." Ultimately the distinction between civilian and military becomes irrelevant for defense systems and doctrines that don't give a shit what uniform you're wearing or what laws you're bound to follow and will vaporize you just the same if they don't like your attitude.
Well, it's THEIR prerogative, really. They've made it clear what their position is.
Yeah, they confirm the affirmative. They sing Naval songs, quote and follow Navy traditions, and yes-for Starfleet personnel, they are beholden to military law. This unavoidable fact, which is referenced in every series is what separates Starfleet from civilians. Oh, that's also referenced in the series-when they refer to civilians as civilians. They are drawing a distinction.
Military Law is what separates Men and Women in today's militaries from civilians also. They are held to a higher standard in a distinct and separate justice system.
Who is they?
Military Law is what separates Men and Women in today's militaries from civilians also. They are held to a higher standard in a distinct and separate justice system.
Who is they?
Among other things, they can also confiscate state property of alien races without starting a war (e.g. "The Enterprise Incident").
This appears to be the whole reason why Galaxy class starships can separate their saucer sections. The ships are positively FULL of people who have no business being in a combat situation.
Similar experience. Both of my grandfathers served in the U.S. Army (one as an artillery spotter, the other as a quartermaster before working as a Postal Inspector). I had a great uncle in the Tuskegee Airmen and a cousin (his son) died over Vietnam. I did two years in ROTC before going to work for a PMC. And my conclusion is that -- with the very notable exceptions of TWOK through TUC -- Star Trek makes NO serious attempt to depict a futuristic military organization, not even a very liberal one. The biggest thing to understand is that most of the things Starfleet avoids doing as "holdovers from medieval traditions" are actually kind of important for the morale and clarity of purpose of a professional fighting force. A soldier needs to be ready able and willing to kill, and more importantly, needs to be pretty GOOD at it. Soldiers can have no illusions about being civilized or fighting on the "right side" or even that their cause is just. They can't afford to, because a soldier can't afford to hesitate or have second thoughts in a combat situation. It's been said that the military doesn't want robots who only follow orders, but it sure as hell doesn't want a bunch of free thinking philosophers who second guess every order that makes them even slightly uncomfortable. No military organization could SURVIVE under those conditions, and the general lack of discipline Starfleet displays is a recipe for collapse in such an organization UNLESS they have some other focus apart from martial prowess and the defense of the homeland.
For that matter, science fiction is SATURATED with more direct depictions of futuristic militaries and paramilitaries that either don't make this mistake or address it head on. Some of these very same issues are addressed (in hammer blows if not gentle touches) in "Ender's Game" and embodied in Ender Wiggin's personal philosophy: "That was just the one fight. I wanted to win all of the rest of them too."
The military does what's necessary to win the war, and negotiating peace is the job of the politicians. Starfleet is unique in that they ALSO take on the role of peacemakers too, and allow themselves to become partially responsible for the safety of their enemies and for extending the olive branch when the opportunity presents itself. This makes them very effective, and it makes them very valuable to the Federation, but it necessarily makes them something much different than a military.
Last edited:
No, they say explicitly "Starfleet is not a military organization, its purpose is exploration." THAT is an unavoidable fact.
You are confusing "facts" with "inferences" and then asking us to believe the latter at the expense of the former. If your conclusions do not fit all of the facts, then your conclusions are wrong.
"Starfleet is not a military organization" is a fact that must be accounted for in all possible conclusions. What conclusion would fit this fact and ALSO the facts that:
Well, you would have to conclude that Starfleet is not a military organization, but is a scientific research and diplomatic body whose most influential members (past and present) came from military backgrounds. Although some of its duties include military missions, the purpose of Starfleet vessels is to expand the body of Federation knowledge.
It is not, however, what separates police officers from civilians, who draw that similar distinction and also follow military traditions to a sometimes alarming degree. But the Police Department is not a military organization,its purpose is to enforce the law.
Also like the police (theoretically)/
The men who said "We are not a military organization" or, alternately, "Do you think you'll be comfortable with military officers coming aboard your ship?"
Starfleet officers over the span of 200 years seem pretty convinced they're not a military organization. The only reasons to think they ARE are political and ideological reasons which are unique to 21st century sensibilities and are also completely irrelevant to the FACTS.
Okay, lets run with that. Accepting that there are cultural issues with Starfleet that make it unlike modern militaries are there any similar issues with characterising them as a law enforcement organisation (because I think that we can all agree that whatever they are, they aren't strictly civilian) assigned to the exploration of space and the resulting scientific, diplomatic and defensive duties?
Kirk also says "Forgive me, I'm a soldier not a diplomat."
As I said, it is more of a challenge to come up with reasons for Starfleet to not be the military and that is what makes it interesting. They easy way is to give up and just call it the space navy, but it is not, therefore the challenge for the 24th century.
Okay this is getting a bit ridiculous. Its cleary been stated here by ppl in the military that star fleets structure is not like the military. Other scifi make it explicit that they have a space military. The day i was convinced that star fleet was not a military was in the ds9 episode when they had some star fleet officers pinned down by the jem'hadar and the defiant crew beamed dowm to help.
It was supposed to be an episode that showed the grittiness of war, however i started laughing my ass off when i realised theses gritty soldiers where wearing office shoes. Once i saw that i couldn't unsee it. These guys where not even wearing boots, they wore office freaking shoes to the front line. Lol it was so distracting that i couldn't take what was happening seriously. It is so obvious star fleet is not a military organisation, from the mannerisms of the staff and the fact that the captains seem to be more politicians and diplomats than soldiers.
After watching that episode of ds9, i realised that starfleet was a bunch of civillians and scientists with military training as an after thought. Do they even have a boot camp, does anyone even seem like a soldier. The closest to real soldiering i saw was with red squad during the dominion war. Those kids had a clearly more martial and militaristic approach than the ds9 and next gen officers combined.
Why we are debating if a futuristic organisation not fitting our modern day standards is beyond me.
Besides ENT showed how not a military starfleet was, ever heard of the macros. Those guys are clearly a military. In a society as widely peaceful and powerful like the federation. They can afford to have an explorative and scientific organisation like starfleet handle their national defense.
I am sure the civillians or any new worlds joining them would prefer to have a civillian and scientific organisation handling military affairs. Its like having nasa in charge of earths defence.
Its starting to feel like you can believe phasers, quantum torpedoes but an organisation that considers it selves scientists and explorers first and soldiers second seems to be beyond ppls comprehension.
And he was regretting that attitude by the end of the episode while the quote I mentioned did come later. But I acknowledge the original series Starfleet was more militaristic or even a military, albeit still pretty different from the traditional type, but don't think that should be very influential in determining the status of the organization decades later.
But they aren't civilians. They even refer to non-Starfleet citizens as "civilians." I'm assuming there is civilian leadership somewhere up the chain of command past all those Admirals, since Starfleet is modeled on the US Navy, which answers to civilian leaders.
Servicemen and women have always been Star Trek fans because if its relatability, including myself.
Since Navy is not by necessity synonymous with Military, it's a perfectly acceptable description. All these people here who claim to be have so much experience with the. military(just short of being in the military) have shared many common misconceptions about the military and its purpose. There's a big difference between navy sailor and infantry soldier. One is there for peacetime, while the latter is established for the purpose of war(whether offensive or defensive.)
But then again, Kirk claims that Starfleet is a "combined service." They not only have a fleet of ships for every purpose, they also have soldiers, like O'Brien, or the guys in "Nor the Battle..."
This thread was not meant to be about proving or disproving the premise, but why do some fans take such an exception to it, and very passionately I might add. I don't think we've gotten to the heart of the matter as of yet.
That's just not true by definition. Starfleet's role as a military or non-military organization aside... a navy sailor is, by definition, a person trained to fight a war. A country's navy is, by definition, established to fight a war on the high seas. Both the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Army have peacetime roles to fill, obviously, but as organizations they are both, by definition, established to fight wars on behalf of the United States. That is their primary purpose.
Or, to quote the U.S. Navy itself:
Source: http://www.navy.mil/navydata/organization/org-top.asp
And whether it's people are plausibly military, the majority of Starfleet vessels seen and every hero ship (even minor ones like the runabouts and the Delta Flyer) are designed for combat use in addition to their other roles of exploration and diplomacy.
So realistically, I can't see how they can be a civilian agency made up only of engineers and scientists, but rather they are IMO a 'combined service' with a mandate 'To Protect and to Serve' the interests of the United Federation of Planets in all respects. A fictional example would be the 'Strategic Response Unit' from Flashpoint - motto Connect, Respect, Protect. 'Connect' to the subject, respect the subject, protect (the subject as far as possible and) the victims and the public in general. This appears to be consistent with Starfleet SOP, but not necessarily modern militaries.
The US Navy was established to protect maritime commerce and has existed since the country was founded. Back then, Navies were not considered part of the military. Post ww2 The department of the Navy and the War department were combined into the defense department.
The word "military" is related to the word "miles" and has its origins in the Roman roads that Roman armies constructed with mile markers to march along. So military "literally" means "marching soldiers."
That's the distinction I'm drawing upon. It's important to this discussion as navies have always been at the forefront of exploration. They have been for the most part the only organizations with the resources to be able to conduct long range exploration. It's also good to know after so many comments saying something to the effect of "Starfleet are nothing like soldiers." It's true, because they're futuristic sailors in space.
- Status
