Why the Resistance to Starfleet as a Military?

[neozeks]

You, and several others, are hanging on a premise that consists entirely of "actions speak louder than words," in this case even when the actions CONTRADICT the words.

Not really. It all depends on the quantity of 'words' and 'actions'. Earth Starfleet was referred to as non-military several times and never (excluding that court-martial reference) as a military. Therefore, it is logical to say it is not a military, at least not until later. Federation Starfleet was refered to as non-military only one time, with multiple references to it being a military. So it is a military.

So something about the nature of Starfleet's existence--historical and political context, in other words--generates a situation where Starfleet is seen doing things traditionally done by the military, and yet everyone seems to agree that Starfleet isn't the military.

My theory would be that Earth Starfleet was originally kept officially non-military to appease the Vulcans and their dislike of human 'aggressiveness' spreading through the stars. But it was clearly organized along military lines and armed so as to allow a transformation into an official military if the need arises and the atmosphere becomes suitable for that (which indeed happened with the Xindi and subsequent crises and the change of Vulcan attitude to Earth after the Reformation).

Whatever Earth Starfleet was when they protected Earth from the Xindi, or the Fortunate from the Nausicans, or kicked fifty tons of Suliban ass in "Shockwave I and II," the Federation Starfleet is as well.

Since it's posible Earth Starfleet itself wasn't legally and officially the same thing in season 1 as in season 4, I don't think that follows.

What WAS Starfleet on those occasions? I don't know... do you?

As I see it, Earth Starfleet was originally an uniformed service that was legally and officially non-military - but as it saw increasing use as Earth's de facto military space force, it eventually became a de jure one. Federation Starfleet was a military organization from the start. Of course, it's all a matter of preference...

But my whole point in the previous post was not to return to this discussion but to show that, since it was Earth's de facto space military and main provider of space military power, Earth Starfleet would be too important to United Earth for them to give it entirely over to sole federal control (at least not without the other members doing the same).

 

[Crazy Eddie]

My theory would be that Earth Starfleet was originally kept officially non-military to appease the Vulcans and their dislike of human 'aggressiveness' spreading through the stars. But it was clearly organized along military lines and armed so as to allow a transformation into an official military if the need arises and the atmosphere becomes suitable for that (which indeed happened with the Xindi and subsequent crises and the change of Vulcan attitude to Earth after the Reformation).

Meaning Archer, Forest and Hernandez simply don't know what they're talking about and Starfleet was REALLY a military all along.

Unfortunately, though, the "legal trick to appease the Vulcans" theory doesn't hold water, given that Admiral Forrest was discussing possible joint missions with Vulcan in "The Forge," just minutes before he was killed by that putative Syrannite bomb. If the NOT being a military was a step to appease the Vulcans, than Forrest could not rationally expect them to consider his request after converting to one.

Whatever Earth Starfleet was when they protected Earth from the Xindi, or the Fortunate from the Nausicans, or kicked fifty tons of Suliban ass in "Shockwave I and II," the Federation Starfleet is as well.

Since it's posible Earth Starfleet itself wasn't legally and officially the same thing in season 1 as in season 4, I don't think that follows.

No change is even necessary, though, since even by Vulcan standards their participation in combat was both lawful and inevitable.

What WAS Starfleet on those occasions? I don't know... do you?

As I see it, Earth Starfleet was originally an uniformed service that was legally and officially non-military - but as it saw increasing use as Earth's de facto military space force, it eventually became a de jure one.

The thing is, there's no logical reason why de facto isn't sufficient for their role in the Federation. There are many reasons why a nation transitions from militias and guerrilla cells to full standing armies (whether or not they actually develop a navy or air force is another matter entirely). Most of these reasons involve specialization and capability: guerrilla cells can't fight defensive wars, and militias can ONLY fight defensive wars. There comes the need to create organizations that can engage offensively, and with that carries certain legal and political implications regarding when and where that organization can operate at all.

Starfleet doesn't have this problem, because it could ALREADY engage in offensive operations long before anyone thought of teaming up with the MACOs. The logistics issue is settled: Starfleet has the equipment and the expertise (to some extent) to do it. The legal issue is also settled, interestingly enough, since in all the various interstellar conflicts it doesn't appear that major races actually bother to declare war on Each other, they just decide to bomb one planet or another and dare their enemies to stop them.

But my whole point in the previous post was not to return to this discussion but to show that, since it was Earth's de facto space military and main provider of space military power, Earth Starfleet would be too important to United Earth for them to give it entirely over to sole federal control (at least not without the other members doing the same).

And MY point is that a "de facto space military" isn't important enough to loose any sleep over for a people who don't have any off-world colonies, don't have enough ships to police their own trade routes (and have never bothered to try), don't have any interstellar strategic obligations or resource interests and probably rank slightly below Bajor in terms of deep space experience. It hasn't been around long enough and doesn't represent a large enough investment for United Earth to want to keep unrestricted control of it; they probably figure they can create something even better for themselves, or even develop a space-faring branch of the MACOs for defense of the Sol system.

In "Home" it is clearly shown that Starfleet's moonlighting gig as a combat force is strongly at odds with its broader goal as an exploratory agency. Archer suggests that they follow Vulcan's example and "keep their ships close to home," but Ericka correctly points out they wouldn't get much exploring done in that case. So what do you do? You give Starfleet away to the Federation, where they are no longer responsible for Earth's defense, and let them explore to their heart's content (where 99% of the time any combat they have to do will be in deep deep space).

 

[Destructor]

I'm a fan Gene Rodenberry's idea that humans can learn to solve problems without senseless brutalities and stand united.... But let's be honest, I think that's kindda delusional in a different way they way he portrays it on Star Trek. That's kindda like not believing there is no evil in the world.... If we just stick to our guns and behave like normal human beings, everything is going to be alright in the end. So we go on and act like we're perfect people and that life is perfect when we want it to be. But in reality sometimes some things that happen in life doesn't always turn out as we planned.

That's a very good way to sum up Deep Space Nine.

 

[Vincent Law]

And yet even in "The Expanse," this takes place several days before our first overt reference to Starfleet NOT being a military organization, later in that very same episode. And even after all the shit Archer had to go through with the Xindi, we STILL have Ericka's quote from "Home" the following season that continues to differentiate the two, this at a time when Enterprise has already been upgraded with double its original armament and Columbia was outfitted with that armament from the start. We seem to have come full circle again...

And yet the action taken in the Delphic Expanse was a military action, taken by Earth Starfleet. There's no getting around that, even if the characters say otherwise on screen due to a lack of logic on the part of the writers.

You, and several others, are hanging on a premise that consists entirely of "actions speak louder than words," in this case even when the actions CONTRADICT the words.

Which is why emphasis is placed on actions, and Starfleet acts like a military. So since this is clearly the case, and getting back to the purpose of this thread, why are you resistant to the idea that Starfleet is a military?

 

[C.E. Evans]

I'm a fan Gene Rodenberry's idea that humans can learn to solve problems without senseless brutalities and stand united.... But let's be honest, I think that's kindda delusional in a different way they way he portrays it on Star Trek. That's kindda like not believing there is no evil in the world.... If we just stick to our guns and behave like normal human beings, everything is going to be alright in the end. So we go on and act like we're perfect people and that life is perfect when we want it to be. But in reality sometimes some things that happen in life doesn't always turn out as we planned.

The idea of "perfect Humans" is something of a myth created by fans. Roddenberry seemed to envision a time where Humans no longer fought with themselves over issues of who they are, but personal conflicts were still quite evident in TNG. The primary difference was that they didn't resort to violence to resolve them and that they were usually confined to individual topics at hand. They acted like civilized adults, but they were still capable of making mistakes and disagreeing with one another.

And much of the complaints about Roddenberry's perfect Humans came after he had basically turned over the reigns to Berman during TNG's first season. By season three, Berman was really the one in charge with Roddenberry reduced to just giving his stamp of approval of the direction Berman was taking Trek in. By 1991--and perhaps even much earlier--Roddenberry had nothing more to do with the direction Trek took...

 

[Crazy Eddie]

And yet even in "The Expanse," this takes place several days before our first overt reference to Starfleet NOT being a military organization, later in that very same episode. And even after all the shit Archer had to go through with the Xindi, we STILL have Ericka's quote from "Home" the following season that continues to differentiate the two, this at a time when Enterprise has already been upgraded with double its original armament and Columbia was outfitted with that armament from the start. We seem to have come full circle again...

And yet the action taken in the Delphic Expanse was a military action, taken by Earth Starfleet. There's no getting around that, even if the characters say otherwise on screen due to a lack of logic on the part of the writers.

And all it tells you is that, at least in the Trek universe, military actions no longer require an actual military.

You, and several others, are hanging on a premise that consists entirely of "actions speak louder than words," in this case even when the actions CONTRADICT the words.

Which is why emphasis is placed on actions, and Starfleet acts like a military.

Except that militaries, like MOST things in the world, are not defined purely by their actions.

Picard, for example, sometimes acts like an archeologist. But he isn't, he's a starship captain.
Data sometimes acts like a concert violinist. But he isn't, he's an operations officer.
Worf sometimes acts like a martial arts instructor. But he isn't, he's a tactical officer.
Jadzia Dax sometimes acts like a Klingon. But she isn't, she's a Trill.

Starfleet sometimes acts like a military. But it isn't, it's an exploratory organization.

So since this is clearly the case, and getting back to the purpose of this thread, why are you resistant to the idea that Starfleet is a military?

For the same reason I'd be resistant to the idea of Data as a concert violinist who works for Starfleet. He isn't, he's a Starfleet officer who plays the violin.

In the same sense, Starfleet is not a military organization that explores the galaxy. It's an exploratory organization that defends it's country.

 

[Subcommander R.]

I'd say its a multi-role force. Like a combination of the Peace Corps, Navy, Merchant Marine, and Coast Guard.

Is it a military? Yes and no. Clearly since it has a Navy chain of command, organization, and rank structure it is military in origin. And heck 'fleet' should be a giveaway. But simultaneously its clear the fleet doesn't carry out an exclusively military mission.

 

[Vincent Law]

And all it tells you is that, at least in the Trek universe, military actions no longer require an actual military.

No it doesn't.

Except that militaries, like MOST things in the world, are not defined purely by their actions.

They are when it comes to military actions, not to mention how they serve the state in that role.

Picard, for example, sometimes acts like an archeologist. But he isn't, he's a starship captain.
Data sometimes acts like a concert violinist. But he isn't, he's an operations officer.
Worf sometimes acts like a martial arts instructor. But he isn't, he's a tactical officer.
Jadzia Dax sometimes acts like a Klingon. But she isn't, she's a Trill.

Using individual personal interests is one of the weakest arguments someone can come up with on this matter.

Starfleet sometimes acts like a military. But it isn't, it's an exploratory organization.

MIlitaries have historically been exploratory organizations, as well as humanitarian relief organizations and scientific research organizations. Have you ever seen the number of career paths one can take in the military? There are quite a few.

For the same reason I'd be resistant to the idea of Data as a concert violinist who works for Starfleet. He isn't, he's a Starfleet officer who plays the violin.

That is a hyperbolic non-answer. You have not answered my question.

In the same sense, Starfleet is not a military organization that explores the galaxy. It's an exploratory organization that defends it's country.

What is the reason you need to see it that way? The military has historically done exploratory missions, so why is this somehow incompatible in your view?

 

[CoveTom]

The idea of "perfect Humans" is something of a myth created by fans. Roddenberry seemed to envision a time where Humans no longer fought with themselves over issues of who they are, but personal conflicts were still quite evident in TNG.

I don't know. Any number of people who dealt with Gene Roddenberry in the later years of his Trek tenure, from Harve Bennett to Ronald D. Moore, have all basically agreed that Roddenberry decreed there should be no interpersonal conflict of any kind in Trek. That humans had evolved past that. Not just violent conflict, but conflict period. Which seems rather ridiculous to me.

 

[T'Girl]

In "peace time" Starfleet may have engage in abundant exploration missions, but when the need for war fighting arose Starfleet drops it's little exploration side missions like a hot potato. Which makes war fighting the primary job, and exploration secondary. Even if exploration is what they do the majority of the time, it's still a lower priority side occupation to Starfleet's main priority as a military force.

Calling Starfleet, even during peace time, a exploration organization with guns, is like calling the American military, during peace time, a training organization with gun ... because that is mostly what the American military does in peace time, train.

Starship aren't explorers with a war fighting capacity.

Starships are warships with a exploring capacity. The only time we see a Starfleet vessel that doesn't fit that desription is the Grissom (TSFS), and that it might have simply been a small warship with a inept Captain. Even their 24th century transports, shuttles (VOY) and runabouts (DS9) carry weapons that can damage an opponents dedicated warship,

Picard: "Does anyone remember when we used to be explorers?" The various secondary jobs gets shelved is favor of the primary job, when the time comes to break things and hurt people.

 

[Sci]

I for one would like to suggest that it's a mistake to think that either defense or exploration is the primary mission. They're co-equal.

 

[Anwar]

The idea of "perfect Humans" is something of a myth created by fans. Roddenberry seemed to envision a time where Humans no longer fought with themselves over issues of who they are, but personal conflicts were still quite evident in TNG.

I don't know. Any number of people who dealt with Gene Roddenberry in the later years of his Trek tenure, from Harve Bennett to Ronald D. Moore, have all basically agreed that Roddenberry decreed there should be no interpersonal conflict of any kind in Trek. That humans had evolved past that. Not just violent conflict, but conflict period. Which seems rather ridiculous to me.

Roddenberry didn't practice what he preached, even in TNG season one we had guest start characters whom the cast conflicted with.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

And all it tells you is that, at least in the Trek universe, military actions no longer require an actual military.

No it doesn't.

Yes it does. Starfleet wasn't a military organization when it went into the expanse, and yet you're saying it was conducting a military action despite this. Ergo, a non-military organization can conduct a military action.

Of course we know this already, since in the real world the only difference between a military and an insurgency is that the former has the sanction of law and the latter does not. If we lived in an environment where nobody gave a shit whether combatants were legally sanctioned or not--say, an enormous water planet where 99% of its surface is covered by international waters--then that distinction would disappear altogether.

They are when it comes to military actions

But not military organizations.

Using individual personal interests is one of the weakest arguments someone can come up with on this matter.

Actually it's just a matter of descriptive priority. What, after all, is Data's primary role on the Enterprise? Concert violinist, or operations officer? By the exact same token, what is Starfleet's primary role in the Federation? Exploration and peaceful contact with alien civilizations, or national defense?

MIlitaries have historically been exploratory organizations

No, militaries have historically been WARFIGHTING organizations that happen to engage in exploratory missions when it suits them to do so. The primary reason for this, of course, is that until very recently only military organizations ever had the equipment or the training to pull off a major expedition into uncharted territory with a reasonable expectation of coming back alive. For example, only the nuclear-powered SSN-571 stood a snowball's chance in hell of navigating under the polar ice caps, and the only organizations on Earth that build and operate nuclear submarines are all military organizations.

But this is not so in Star Trek. Earth Starfleet is an explicitly non-military organization that possesses the fastest ships and the most advanced weapons and technology ever conceived by human hands. These things were developed SPECIFICALLY for a mission of exploration, and were pressed into combat service only when it suddenly became necessary to do so. So we have the opposite case: in our world, the military has the best ships, the best training, the best funding and the best equipment. In the Trekiverse, the SPACE PROGRAM has all these things, which ironically means the space program now has to put that equipment into combat use when violence ensues.

For the same reason I'd be resistant to the idea of Data as a concert violinist who works for Starfleet. He isn't, he's a Starfleet officer who plays the violin.

That is a hyperbolic non-answer. You have not answered my question.

Yes I did. I reiterate: Starfleet's primary mission is NOT military in nature, despite their willingness and ability to perform that mission. In exactly the same way that Data's primary function on the Enterprise is not Classical Violin Performance, despite the fact that he is able to perform that function better than any man alive. It's what he can do, it's what he often does, but it's not what he's here for.

What is the reason you need to see it that way? The military has historically done exploratory missions, so why is this somehow incompatible in your view?

I don't have a NEED to see it any way at all, that's just the way it is. It's like if you were to ask me about the Federation developing weapons of mass destruction in TWOK. I tell you "Genesis is a terraforming device, not a weapon," and you tell me "Many weapons have historically had peaceful purposes, so why is this somehow incompatible in your view?"

I guess my point is that Starfleet's EXPLORATION aspect has always been its primary emphasis. As such, exploration and scientific research is not "Something we can do during peacetime," but is instead "Something we don't get to do during wartime."

Perhaps you might consider the fact that standing militaries are a consequence of large populous cultures in extremely tight quarters competing over a finite quantity of resources on a single planet. Starfleet operates in deep space, 99% of which is uninhabitted, and has been found to possess a great many hazardous things of a purely non-military nature. There are ALOT of things they need to be prepared to protect the Federation from, and hostile aliens from neighboring empires isn't always--or even usually--at the top of the list.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

I for one would like to suggest that it's a mistake to think that either defense or exploration is the primary mission. They're co-equal.

I don't believe they ARE co-equal, for the reasons mentioned above: most of the things that threaten the Federation AREN'T of a military nature, at least insofar as semi-omnipotent energy beings, space-dwelling life forms, rock monsters, exotic diseases, wayward deities and complicated spatial anomalies are not easily solved by military solutions.

 

[C.E. Evans]

The idea of "perfect Humans" is something of a myth created by fans. Roddenberry seemed to envision a time where Humans no longer fought with themselves over issues of who they are, but personal conflicts were still quite evident in TNG.

I don't know. Any number of people who dealt with Gene Roddenberry in the later years of his Trek tenure, from Harve Bennett to Ronald D. Moore, have all basically agreed that Roddenberry decreed there should be no interpersonal conflict of any kind in Trek. That humans had evolved past that. Not just violent conflict, but conflict period. Which seems rather ridiculous to me.

Roddenberry didn't practice what he preached, even in TNG season one we had guest start characters whom the cast conflicted with.

Roddenberry wasn't anti-conflict, but he wanted the conflict to come from outside the Enterprise in TNG. So yes, he would have characters come in to create tension--and quite a few of them were Human.

 

[Sci]

I for one would like to suggest that it's a mistake to think that either defense or exploration is the primary mission. They're co-equal.

I don't believe they ARE co-equal, for the reasons mentioned above: most of the things that threaten the Federation AREN'T of a military nature, at least insofar as semi-omnipotent energy beings, space-dwelling life forms, rock monsters, exotic diseases, wayward deities and complicated spatial anomalies are not easily solved by military solutions.

And yet, if it's the official defense agency that undertakes the process of thwarting against omnipotent energy beings or wayward gods, that's still an act of national defense undertaken by the military.

You're confusing, once again, "military" with "combat."

 

[Paradon]

I'm a fan Gene Rodenberry's idea that humans can learn to solve problems without senseless brutalities and stand united.... But let's be honest, I think that's kindda delusional in a different way they way he portrays it on Star Trek. That's kindda like not believing there is no evil in the world.... If we just stick to our guns and behave like normal human beings, everything is going to be alright in the end. So we go on and act like we're perfect people and that life is perfect when we want it to be. But in reality sometimes some things that happen in life doesn't always turn out as we planned.

The idea of "perfect Humans" is something of a myth created by fans. Roddenberry seemed to envision a time where Humans no longer fought with themselves over issues of who they are, but personal conflicts were still quite evident in TNG. The primary difference was that they didn't resort to violence to resolve them and that they were usually confined to individual topics at hand. They acted like civilized adults, but they were still capable of making mistakes and disagreeing with one another.

And much of the complaints about Roddenberry's perfect Humans came after he had basically turned over the reigns to Berman during TNG's first season. By season three, Berman was really the one in charge with Roddenberry reduced to just giving his stamp of approval of the direction Berman was taking Trek in. By 1991--and perhaps even much earlier--Roddenberry had nothing more to do with the direction Trek took...

This is why it is so important that we respect other people's point of view and other people...no matter how strange they are or their believes, we need to respect them and treat them with dignity they deserve. Take the Mormons, for example, just because you don't agree with their believes, it doesn't mean you can hurt, or kill them, or bad mouthing them over silly little thing. People from other countries, cultures, and religions are people, too. They are just as diverse of a people as you or I are. I don't think religions or people's personal believes is the cause of all the wars, I think some psychopaths it's OK to kill people who don't agree with them. I don't think anyone is that stupid to think that it's OK to kill and torture people. People like that are psychopaths. Almost every tyrants are psychopathic....Osama Bin Ladan, Hitler, Stalin, Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, and Pol Pot.... This why there are so many wars because people refuse to accept other people for who they are base on their ethnicity, religions or whatever their believes are.

 

[Vincent Law]

Yes it does. Starfleet wasn't a military organization when it went into the expanse, and yet you're saying it was conducting a military action despite this. Ergo, a non-military organization can conduct a military action.

You are using circular logic. Starfleet conducted a military operation and has acted like a military since it was sent on that mission, ergo it is a military and has been since at least then, if not before.

Of course we know this already, since in the real world the only difference between a military and an insurgency is that the former has the sanction of law and the latter does not.

And training, and uniforms, and a chain of command, and rule of law, but lets leave politics out of this, shall we?

If we lived in an environment where nobody gave a shit whether combatants were legally sanctioned or not--say, an enormous water planet where 99% of its surface is covered by international waters--then that distinction would disappear altogether.

The Federation is a state, and the state controls a military organization - Starfleet.

But not military organizations.

MIlitaries take military actions in defense of their controlling states and their interests.

Actually it's just a matter of descriptive priority. What, after all, is Data's primary role on the Enterprise? Concert violinist, or operations officer? By the exact same token, what is Starfleet's primary role in the Federation? Exploration and peaceful contact with alien civilizations, or national defense?

No, this is simply a weak argument. Starfleet is easily defined as a military through what it does, even in addition to acting in defense of the Federation. Exploration and everything else is not mutually exclusive with Starfleet being a military and in fact militaries have done so historically and continue to do so.

No, militaries have historically been WARFIGHTING organizations that happen to engage in exploratory missions when it suits them to do so. The primary reason for this, of course, is that until very recently only military organizations ever had the equipment or the training to pull off a major expedition into uncharted territory with a reasonable expectation of coming back alive.

Kind of like Starfleet would in the vastness of space, what with all those ships and people trained to operate them.

For example, only the nuclear-powered SSN-571 stood a snowball's chance in hell of navigating under the polar ice caps, and the only organizations on Earth that build and operate nuclear submarines are all military organizations.

Exactly.

But this is not so in Star Trek. Earth Starfleet is an explicitly non-military organization

Why, because a few characters said so? Again, actions speak louder than words, and even Earth Starfleet, your fallback from discussing the Federation version, acted like a military. So either the characters were delusional (the Vulcans seemed to think so) or the writers were attempting to repeat the same oddball nonsense that Gene Roddenberry said on the matter some time ago without really understanding the implications of what that actually meant.

that possesses the fastest ships and the most advanced weapons and technology ever conceived by human hands. These things were developed SPECIFICALLY for a mission of exploration, and were pressed into combat service only when it suddenly became necessary to do so.

Which was essentially in every episode from the very beginning. So if you argue that Starfleet was not a military during the mission into the Expanse, then the Enterprise should have been given a military commission and have been operated by the military. Earth was under military threat, so its military should have dealt with that threat. The lack of this happening is directly attributable to hack writing, but an in-universe explanation would be that Starfleet was a military organization at that point, even if it wasn't initially.

So we have the opposite case: in our world, the military has the best ships, the best training, the best funding and the best equipment. In the Trekiverse, the SPACE PROGRAM has all these things, which ironically means the space program now has to put that equipment into combat use when violence ensues.

Or the military still has the best equipment and funding, as defense isn't exactly an area a state would want to be lacking in.

Yes I did.

No, you didn't. You avoided the question, so I am forced to ask again - what exactly is your issue with Starfleet being a military? You seem to be quite passionate about the issue, yet for all the discussion, you have yet to give an answer with much substance.

I don't have a NEED to see it any way at all, that's just the way it is.

No, it isn't. And if you do not need to see it that way, you certainly seem to be acting that way, as you are putting up a lot of resistance to the idea.

It's like if you were to ask me about the Federation developing weapons of mass destruction in TWOK.

You mean the movie in which Starfleet was explicitly referred to as the military?

I tell you "Genesis is a terraforming device, not a weapon," and you tell me "Many weapons have historically had peaceful purposes, so why is this somehow incompatible in your view?"

Again, no, this is a hyperbolic comparison, to the point that I would even call it a straw man argument. There is not even remotely a basis for comparison here any more than the idea that somehow saying that since an individual has a hobby that is not their primary job, Starfleet is not a military, which is essentially arguing that Starfleet defends the Federation and fights wars as a hobby.

I guess my point is that Starfleet's EXPLORATION aspect has always been its primary emphasis. As such, exploration and scientific research is not "Something we can do during peacetime," but is instead "Something we don't get to do during wartime."

Participating in exploration and scientific research is not mutually exclusive with being a military. How many times does this have to be repeated? You've admitted as much yourself by pointing out that this tends to be the case because the military has the equipment and the people. Why do you now insist on arguing that Starfleet is somehow different, and can't be a military and carry out exploration and scientific research.

Perhaps you might consider the fact that standing militaries are a consequence of large populous cultures in extremely tight quarters competing over a finite quantity of resources on a single planet.

Militaries exist to serve their state and its politics. This goes for everything from expansionism, to basic defense, to exploration and many other roles.

Starfleet operates in deep space, 99% of which is uninhabitted, and has been found to possess a great many hazardous things of a purely non-military nature. There are ALOT of things they need to be prepared to protect the Federation from, and hostile aliens from neighboring empires isn't always--or even usually--at the top of the list.

And yet none of that is a compelling argument as to why Starfleet isn't a military when it clearly looks and acts like one. If anything you are making an argument in favor of Starfleet being the Federation's military by pointing out that the Federation must be defended and that Starfleet is the organization which does this.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

I for one would like to suggest that it's a mistake to think that either defense or exploration is the primary mission. They're co-equal.

I don't believe they ARE co-equal, for the reasons mentioned above: most of the things that threaten the Federation AREN'T of a military nature, at least insofar as semi-omnipotent energy beings, space-dwelling life forms, rock monsters, exotic diseases, wayward deities and complicated spatial anomalies are not easily solved by military solutions.

And yet, if it's the official defense agency that undertakes the process of thwarting against omnipotent energy beings or wayward gods, that's still an act of national defense undertaken by the military.

You're confusing, once again, "military" with "combat."

That's not a confusion, Sci. The primary purpose of a military organization is national defense against other countries, or more specifically, other countries' militaries. Secondary roles are served as well, not because of the nature of the military, but the nature of its equipment. Poorly equipped militaries can't and don't engage in expansive secondary roles, as they have a hard enough time just building readiness for their PRIMARY one.

Starfleet's primary task is not focused on on defense against other worlds, least of all other world's space forces. In the same way that a very well-funded and well-equipped military can afford to expand its priorities to non-combat roles (and can even tolerate a small degree of scope creep) a very well-funded and well-equipped exploration fleet can afford to expand its priorities into combat roles.

 

[BillJ]

I don't believe they ARE co-equal, for the reasons mentioned above: most of the things that threaten the Federation AREN'T of a military nature, at least insofar as semi-omnipotent energy beings, space-dwelling life forms, rock monsters, exotic diseases, wayward deities and complicated spatial anomalies are not easily solved by military solutions.

And yet, if it's the official defense agency that undertakes the process of thwarting against omnipotent energy beings or wayward gods, that's still an act of national defense undertaken by the military.

You're confusing, once again, "military" with "combat."

That's not a confusion, Sci. The primary purpose of a military organization is national defense against other countries, or more specifically, other countries' militaries. Secondary roles are served as well, not because of the nature of the military, but the nature of its equipment. Poorly equipped militaries can't and don't engage in expansive secondary roles, as they have a hard enough time just building readiness for their PRIMARY one.

Starfleet's primary task is not focused on on defense against other worlds, least of all other world's space forces. In the same way that a very well-funded and well-equipped military can afford to expand its priorities to non-combat roles (and can even tolerate a small degree of scope creep) a very well-funded and well-equipped exploration fleet can afford to expand its priorities into combat roles.

Oh give it up. An exploration organization wouldn't have starships that could devastate the entire habitable surface of a planet.