Would a series of Star Trek soldier/pilot novels work?

[JoeZhang]

In addition as mentioned by others, the existence of other powers in the Galaxy necessitates a combat/miltary/warfare specialism or are we expected to believe that Star fleet's plans for dealing with crack Klingon warriors (who clearly do have a martial culture) was to gave an anthropologist or a warp field engineer a phaser rifle and say "get to it!"

 

[captcalhoun]

Starfleet tactics suck ass anyhow. they very rarely use the third dimension in space, they frequently turn broadside to the enemy to evade them, thus presenting a bigger target and they rarely stand off and pound the shit out of the enemy with a torpedo barrage instead favouring the phasers.

let's not even get into the fact that during an advance no fire team - sorry, AWAY team - ever bothers to cover their six, or that fact that they hardly ever use cover fire...

 

[JD]

]

The Federation was unprepared for the Borg and, after BARELY escaping destruction at their hands, what did Starfleet do? Did they commit to a martial posture? No. They rebooted back to their default behavior, exploration with occasional peacekeeping, and did not construct even a single vessel or service division meant strictly for martial activity. You'd think a society that had been naive about the need for an army before that conflict would have their eyes wide open after. And yet the Dominion, within fairly short order, proved they had not done any of that.

Are you sure, because I could have sworn that they did make references in either TNG or DS9, to the fact that ever since the discovery of the Borg and Wolf 359 they had started to focus more energy on defense.

As for what Starfleet is, I'd always kind of thought of them as a military who was "evolved" enough that fighting was not their primary purpose. I'm not saying it isn't one of the purposes of Starfleet, because it's always seemed to me at least that it was, just that it's not their main purpose like it is for today's militaries.

 

[JoeZhang]

Starfleet tactics suck ass anyhow. they very rarely use the third dimension in space, they frequently turn broadside to the enemy to evade them, thus presenting a bigger target and they rarely stand off and pound the shit out of the enemy with a torpedo barrage instead favouring the phasers.

let's not even get into the fact that during an advance no fire team - sorry, AWAY team - ever bothers to cover their six, or that fact that they hardly ever use cover fire...

Hand to hand combat has always bothered me as well - you'd get your ass handed to you if you tried some of those stupid double handed punches they always seem to use...

 

[Dancing Doctor]

]
Are you sure, because I could have sworn that they did make references in either TNG or DS9, to the fact that ever since the discovery of the Borg and Wolf 359 they had started to focus more energy on defense.

Of course they would! After getting their ass handed to them at Wolf 359 and being placed into a very weak position, Starfleet and the Federation would have to change tactics. Hence the development of the starship classes that I mentioned earlier, as well as the differences in other starship classes. The Sovereign-class can certainly explore and is equipped to do science missions, but its design is a result of improved tactical thinking (no "neck" to strike at, thinner width, better defenses).

As for what Starfleet is, I'd always kind of thought of them as a military who was "evolved" enough that fighting was not their primary purpose. I'm not saying it isn't one of the purposes of Starfleet, because it's always seemed to me at least that it was, just that it's not their main purpose like it is for today's militaries.

That's not really disputed, and is a highly valid analysis of Starfleet.

 

[Iceburgeruk]

The simple fact is that for the federation to exist in such a violent and opportunistic universe it must have an professional army otherwise it would have been overrun by an enemy long ago.

Agreed.
What this ground force is actually *called*, is up in the air. Federation Marines, Starfleet Marines, hell even the MACOS (they could still exist as a distinct force). All are possible. But they must have something.

And they must be separate from the rank and file of Starfleet. You can't just take any starship crew member, slap a phaser in their hand, and send them to the front lines. Military training doesn't work like that, and never will. That would be like taking a security guard at Wal-Mart and sending them to Iraq - it logically would not work. Specialization is mandatory.

Starfleet has ground troops - we all know it. They were mentioned AND SHOWN on DS9 (and the MACOS in ENT). We don't know what they're called, but they *must exist*. They are ground troops, and that must be ALL that they are.

And of course there's COLONEL West in ST VI.

Starfleet may not be militarISTIC, but it is MILITARY. There is a difference.

The thing I've always found odd about Starfleet's ground forces is how one-dimensional they are. They don't seem to possess any equipment beyond phaser rifles, they have no tanks, they have no motors or cannons - pretty much nothing (which of course is mostly likely explained by the budget of the show), their tactics and behaviour are very amateurish in nature.

Well Elim Garak claimed he was a Gul in The Cardassian Mechanised. So we know the Cradassians have mechanised divisions. So we can assume other federation foes also have mechanized units. And thereby it seems logical that the federation has them too. I mean it is tricky to use a runabout in the same role as a tank in reguards to assiting infantry, so some kind of hover-tank thing is probably around. Why haven`t we seen any of the federation`s mechanised units? Well we have never seen a situation where a land battle in one of the series was large enough to require mechanised support.

By the way what equiptment/gear does everyone think a standard starfleet combat soldier would require which normal security do not carry?

I would say at least:

• Both a phaser rifle and phaser.
• A combat knife of some kind.
• Supplies.
• Some of the troops would probably have 24th Century versions of those cool bazooka things from Star Trek 5.

 

[Daddy Todd]

Hey, I have a question...

Can a vegan eat a steak out of the replicator?

Not to change the subject or anything...

 

[JoeZhang]

By the way what equiptment/gear does everyone think a standard starfleet combat soldier would require which normal security do not carry?

I would say at least:

• Both a phaser rifle and phaser.
• A combat knife of some kind.
• Supplies.
• Some of the troops would probably have 24th Century versions of those cool bazooka things from Star Trek 5.

Off the top of my head - they are going to have:

• a HUD of some nature
• some form of electronic counter-measures to get around enemy sensors
• Secured coms using a headset rather than a com badge
• A WATCH (no really!)

 

[Geoff Thorne]

The Defiant. The Prometheus. The Akira. Hell, even the Steamrunner. Aren't those ships pretty much purely defense or meant for martial purposes?

Specifically for the Dominion threat.

And after the Enterprise-D bit it on Veridian, families on starships went the way of the dodo, no?

No. There is at least one family on TITAN with no mention of putting them off the ship. The Trois are actively planning one.

And I would grant you that on the whole Starfleet isn't ruthless and cold-blooded military, but there are a number of officers who are. Nechayev. Leyton. Cartwright. Kennelly. Dougherty. Pressman.

Right, almost invariably presented as opposite to the philosophical thrust of the organizaition as a whole. Officers like that are shown to make nearly all the officers around them extremely uncomfortable. Why would that be in a military culture? Answer: it wouldn't.

Um, again. Defiant. Prometheus. Akira.

Yes. I know. Scrambled to get built to counter the Dominion. The Defiant design in specific was mothballed in the period between the Borg and Dominion conflicts and only reconstituted in the scramble to get a real fighting force prepared for the war. Hardly the pragmatic outlook or behavior of a true military force which, as we all know, regardless of external threats, continues to modify and upgrade martial designs as part of its basic operation. Starfleet clearly did not do this.

I'm not saying there isn't evidence to support your conclusion. There is. As a TV show written by multiple people over several decades, there will be plenty of drift from the basic premise. And we know, over the years, that there was friction between Gene and many subordinates over what his vision actually was. I simply don't agree with the conclusion you've drawn.

POST the Dominion war, you could have a case for Starfleet going fully martial having FINALLY learned the necessary lesson. Only, what do they actually do? Deploy a stack of Lunas to resume their primary mission which is seeking out new life forms and new civilizations.

THe chief upgrades on the Lunas being minor improvements to weapons systems and MASSIVE improvement to sensors and communications. Where are all these warships I keep hearing about? Nowhere. That's where.

"Back to business" for Starfleet means exploration.

 

[JoeZhang]

Um, again. Defiant. Prometheus. Akira.

Yes. I know. Scrambled to get built to counter the Dominion.

Where is there any mention on-screen that the Akira class was built to fight the Dominion and wasn't simply a pre-existing design? That implies the Akira class was designed and built in a matter of months ?

 

[Dancing Doctor]

^The Defiant was specifically for the Borg and, as you pointed out, ultimately used because of the Dominion threat. The Prometheus and Akira were specifically for the Borg as well, or at least the Akira was. And Starfleet had continually updated its designs to deal with the less-peaceful galaxy.

And in regards to the family on Titan, as well as the possibility of a third Troi, that's more a result of the shifting back to peacetime operations that Starfleet is encouraging. That doesn't mean that Starfleet is going to be like TNG, again, however.

 

[David Mack]

I said early on that I would concede paramilitary. Police are paramilitary. So are the Boy Scouts. So is the Salvation Army.

Police don't have courts martial. The Boy Scouts don't have weapons, and neither does the Salvation Army (which is actually a religious organization and doesn't even qualify as a paramilitary organization). And none of them is charged with national defense, operates capital ships, or is capable of placing the state under martial law.

You guys don't take the members of Starfleet at their word (which I find odd), claiming they are either naive or lying, but, for me, it's simple. They are what they say they are. It's not just Picard who has made that statement. Multiple officers in multiple series have done the same. Even Quark does, though it's through the lens of Ferengi disgust.

For every line you quote to say that Starfleet isn't a military organization, we've presented you with a half dozen references that negate your argument. If anyone is failing to take the series' canonical evidence on its face, Geoff, it's you.

Using a military management style doesn't make you the military nor does the possession of deadly weapons. Soldiers don't have the option of shooting their opponents with tranquilizer darts or stun gas instead of bullets. Generals don't claim to be explorers when engaged in a campaign (or ever really).

Having courts martial and the ability to impose martial law, and being tasked with national defense, however, does constitute a military organization. Name even one other type of organization that meets these criteria Geoff, even one. You can't. Because only a military organization meets these criteria.

As for the use of non-lethal weapons, I hate to burst your bubble, but the U.S. Army, U.S. Marine Corps, and U.S. Navy all have been developing non-lethal weapons for urban combat and crowd control. They're working on sonic weapons, shock weapons (such as tasers), and pulses to cause everything from stinging sensations to bowel discomfort, as alternatives to deploying deadly force.

And historically, there is ample precedent for military vessels serving as the means for exploration and scientific inquiry. The famous voyage of Charles Darwin, in which he visited the Galapagos Islands and began making observations that would later prove critical to his evolutionary theory, occurred during his time aboard the H.M.S. Beagle --- a British warship tasked with such military duties as protecting trade routes and suppressing piracy.

So it makes sense that, when under threat, those ships would be retasked for battle. But, until the Dominion showed up, they weren't designing ships for war or training the mass of their people for it either.

They don't see themselves that way.

That speaks to their ethos, but not to their organization, Geoff. It is possible for an organization to be military without being militaristic. Military does not mean aggressive or belligerent. It is simply a term that describes the structure and inherent powers of an organization.

Starfleet meets every one of the popularly defined criteria for a military organization, and the scope of its powers and its responsibilities are far too broad for it to be classified as a paramilitary organization.

Words have meanings, Geoff, and those meanings don't change simply because you bear antipathy for the words themselves (or the concepts behind them).

 

[Turtletrekker]

Well, Starfleet has always been shown as the primary defense for the Federation in times of hostility, that implies militarization right there. But it's a military with different set of priorities and methods than any modern day equivilant. Aside from defense, Starfleet's mission is to "to explore strange new worlds and seek out new life and new civilizations", and if the civilizations are advanced enough, and are willing, they might get to join the Federation. Meanwhile, un-populated worlds might have resources for the state aplenty without an indigenous population to disrupt and plunder. Expansion through exploration and diplomacy, rather than through force of arms. Seems like a much better way to do it.

As for Kirk saying that he's "a soldier, not a diplomat", and Picard saying, "Starfleet is not a military organization. Its purpose is exploration", I think that comes down more to self-image and how they perceive themselves and their job more than anything else.

IIRC, Sisko also called himself a soldier. I don't think the same could be said of Janeway, who I think considered herself a scientist more than a soldier. Archer certainly thought of himself primarily as an explorer who found himself thrust into a military situation. I don't think the idea of a military corps of exploration and defense is such an incompatable idea with anything that's been established in Trek. Being both a soldier and an explorer, (or a diplomat, or a scientist) isn't really that big of a stretch.

 

[Deano2099]

The simple fact is that for the federation to exist in such a violent and opportunistic universe it must have an professional army otherwise it would have been overrun by an enemy long ago.

Agreed.
What this ground force is actually *called*, is up in the air. Federation Marines, Starfleet Marines, hell even the MACOS (they could still exist as a distinct force). All are possible. But they must have something.

And they must be separate from the rank and file of Starfleet. You can't just take any starship crew member, slap a phaser in their hand, and send them to the front lines. Military training doesn't work like that, and never will. That would be like taking a security guard at Wal-Mart and sending them to Iraq - it logically would not work. Specialization is mandatory.

Starfleet has ground troops - we all know it. They were mentioned AND SHOWN on DS9 (and the MACOS in ENT). We don't know what they're called, but they *must exist*. They are ground troops, and that must be ALL that they are.

100% agreed with that, but the problem you then get is: why don't these troops have heavily armoured deployment and support vessels of their down. If you're going to make some recruits into soldiers, why aren't some of the ships warships. If the Federation has an army for fighting extra-terrestrial threats, why are there no army ships.
And if there is and it's Starfleet, why are they are they doing all this science and exploration and medical stuff too.

 

[Geoff Thorne]

I said early on that I would concede paramilitary. Police are paramilitary. So are the Boy Scouts. So is the Salvation Army.

Police don't have courts martial. The Boy Scouts don't have weapons, and neither does the Salvation Army (which is actually a religious organization and doesn't even qualify as a paramilitary organization). And none of them is charged with national defense, operates capital ships, or is capable of placing the state under martial law.

You guys don't take the members of Starfleet at their word (which I find odd), claiming they are either naive or lying, but, for me, it's simple. They are what they say they are. It's not just Picard who has made that statement. Multiple officers in multiple series have done the same. Even Quark does, though it's through the lens of Ferengi disgust.

For every line you quote to say that Starfleet isn't a military organization, we've presented you with a half dozen references that negate your argument. If anyone is failing to take the series' canonical evidence on its face, Geoff, it's you.

Using a military management style doesn't make you the military nor does the possession of deadly weapons. Soldiers don't have the option of shooting their opponents with tranquilizer darts or stun gas instead of bullets. Generals don't claim to be explorers when engaged in a campaign (or ever really).

Having courts martial and the ability to impose martial law, and being tasked with national defense, however, does constitute a military organization. Name even one other type of organization that meets these criteria Geoff, even one. You can't. Because only a military organization meets these criteria.

As for the use of non-lethal weapons, I hate to burst your bubble, but the U.S. Army, U.S. Marine Corps, and U.S. Navy all have been developing non-lethal weapons for urban combat and crowd control. They're working on sonic weapons, shock weapons (such as tasers), and pulses to cause everything from stinging sensations to bowel discomfort, as alternatives to deploying deadly force.

And historically, there is ample precedent for military vessels serving as the means for exploration and scientific inquiry. The famous voyage of Charles Darwin, in which he visited the Galapagos Islands and began making observations that would later prove critical to his evolutionary theory, occurred during his time aboard the H.M.S. Beagle --- a British warship tasked with such military duties as protecting trade routes and suppressing piracy.

So it makes sense that, when under threat, those ships would be retasked for battle. But, until the Dominion showed up, they weren't designing ships for war or training the mass of their people for it either.

They don't see themselves that way.

That speaks to their ethos, but not to their organization, Geoff. It is possible for an organization to be military without being militaristic. Military does not mean aggressive or belligerent. It is simply a term that describes the structure and inherent powers of an organization.

Starfleet meets every one of the popularly defined criteria for a military organization, and the scope of its powers and its responsibilities are far too broad for it to be classified as a paramilitary organization.

Words have meanings, Geoff, and those meanings don't change simply because you bear antipathy for the words themselves (or the concepts behind them).

With respect (true respect, not that BS lip service some folks use) I think I've made the case for paramilitary.

Paramilitary
noun 1. a group of civilians organized in a military fashion (especially to operate in place of or to assist regular army troops

Clearly, outside of wartime, Starfleet does not function as a military and the Federation has not been shown to have anything like a standing army.

Adj. 1. Of or relating to a group of civilians organized to function like or to assist a military unit.)


They have rank and file but they have zero in the way of infantry. There are zero actual soldiers in Starfleet post the MACO period. We see the very occasional "armored" security teams in a couple of the films but nothing remotely like a dedicated soldier class.

Starfleet's function is FAR too broad to be limited to a military organization. Its ships are not designed for martial function (with the exception of 3 classes built in wartime). Its officers describe the organization as one of exploration not warfare. Its primary function is neither protection nor attack but exploration.

The best you can prove is paramilitary and that is the the least I can prove.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

The simple fact is that for the federation to exist in such a violent and opportunistic universe it must have an professional army otherwise it would have been overrun by an enemy long ago.

Agreed.
What this ground force is actually *called*, is up in the air. Federation Marines, Starfleet Marines, hell even the MACOS (they could still exist as a distinct force). All are possible. But they must have something.

And they must be separate from the rank and file of Starfleet. You can't just take any starship crew member, slap a phaser in their hand, and send them to the front lines. Military training doesn't work like that, and never will. That would be like taking a security guard at Wal-Mart and sending them to Iraq - it logically would not work. Specialization is mandatory.

Starfleet has ground troops - we all know it. They were mentioned AND SHOWN on DS9 (and the MACOS in ENT). We don't know what they're called, but they *must exist*. They are ground troops, and that must be ALL that they are.

100% agreed with that, but the problem you then get is: why don't these troops have heavily armoured deployment and support vessels of their down. If you're going to make some recruits into soldiers, why aren't some of the ships warships. If the Federation has an army for fighting extra-terrestrial threats, why are there no army ships.

There could be. We haven't seen them, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.

For instance, look at the USS Curry from DS9's "A Time To Stand". It is basically an Excelsior/Miranda kitbash. Notable in that it has its secondary hull out front, and the main shuttlebay on the front of that. Suggesting that this hull is a detachable troop barracks, and the front mounted shuttlebay making it easy for troops to ingress and egress the ship.

And the Holoship from Insurrection could be a training vessel for troops as well.

 

[Rabid Trekkie]

Well, Starfleet has always been shown as the primary defense for the Federation in times of hostility, that implies militarization right there. But it's a military with different set of priorities and methods than any modern day equivilant. Aside from defense, Starfleet's mission is to "to explore strange new worlds and seek out new life and new civilizations", and if the civilizations are advanced enough, and are willing, they might get to join the Federation. Meanwhile, un-populated worlds might have resources for the state aplenty without an indigenous population to disrupt and plunder. Expansion through exploration and diplomacy, rather than through force of arms. Seems like a much better way to do it.

As for Kirk saying that he's "a soldier, not a diplomat", and Picard saying, "Starfleet is not a military organization. Its purpose is exploration", I think that comes down more to self-image and how they perceive themselves and their job more than anything else.

IIRC, Sisko also called himself a soldier. I don't think the same could be said of Janeway, who I think considered herself a scientist more than a soldier. Archer certainly thought of himself primarily as an explorer who found himself thrust into a military situation. I don't think the idea of a military corps of exploration and defense is such an incompatable idea with anything that's been established in Trek. Being both a soldier and an explorer, (or a diplomat, or a scientist) isn't really that big of a stretch.

I think this is where I make the distinction from Starfleet being a military, the fact that most of the time it is about exploration. And while Mack is correct in saying that militaries in the past also functioned as vessels of exploration, it's something I don't think most people consider these days as being part of the military.

And that's not meant to be a slam against the military, my grandfather served in WW2 and Korea, a friend of mine served in Vietnam, my half-uncle served in Iraq 1.0, and I have another friend fixing to head into Iraq as well as a friend who has recently retired from the Air Force. What they do every day makes our country the safe place to live.

But the perception by the public has changed. Without the military we would not have a space program, we may not have the internet, meteorology may not have developed like it has, and without the military advancing the design of the submarine we may have never been able to probe the oceans depths. Yet how often do we hear about that side of the military?

I think that popular idea of the military is why most, including myself, don't really see Starfleet as a military organization. The emphasis on exploration seems to seperate it from what we generally consider a military to be.

 

[KRAD]

I think that popular idea of the military is why most, including myself, don't really see Starfleet as a military organization. The emphasis on exploration seems to seperate it from what we generally consider a military to be.

Well, not to put too fine a point on it but -- so what? A million people may say a wrong thing and it's still wrong. Perception clashes with reality here. Just because people don't view the military that way doesn't mean the the military doesn't actually perform those functions.

 

[LightningStorm]

Starfleet's function is FAR too broad to be limited to a military organization.

Maybe this is the problem. Nobody said it was limited to being a military org, just that it is ALSO a military org in addition to a peaceful exploratory organization.

 

[David Mack]

Starfleet's function is FAR too broad to be limited to a military organization.

No, it isn't. Your definition of a military organization is too narrow. As already mentioned upthread, military pilots and scientists have served as mission crews for NASA since its inception. In the past, the military provided support for exploration and colonization. Starfleet's duties are entirely consistent with the historical roles played by military organizations.

Its ships are not designed for martial function (with the exception of 3 classes built in wartime).

Bullshit. Any one of them carries enough firepower to slag a planet. "Not designed for martial function"? If it can mete out deadly force, it's designed for martial function, Geoff.

Its officers describe the organization as one of exploration not warfare.

No one ever said it was "for warfare". Few groups of people have less desire for war than members of the uniformed services. And for your few examples of characters stating that Starfleet isn't military, we have presented others who said it was.

Famously, Dr. David Marcus complained in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, when he believed that Starfleet had asserted control over the Genesis Project, that "Scientists have always been pawns of the military!" In other words, Federation citizens see Starfleet as "the military."

Likewise, Sisko described himself as "a soldier."

Its primary function is neither protection nor attack but exploration.

That was never disputed, but its other functions and inherent powers are what define its status as a military organization. Even if exploration and diplomatic outreach are its principal objectives as an organization, it can be and is a military organization charged with those duties.

Starfleet is military-plus --- a more enlightened, more advanced, less belligerent institution than 21st-century militaries. It, like humanity, has evolved into something better. But just as 24th-century humans are still humans, Starfleet is a 24th-century military.

The best you can prove is paramilitary and that is the the least I can prove.

No, I've already proved its powers are too great to be paramilitary, and I've proved that it meets all the criteria for military:

* It has a rigid hierarchical rank structure
* It holds courts martial for internal breaches of discipline
* It is charged with national defense
* During times of war, its members are the Federation's combatants
* It is empowered to wield lethal force on behalf of the state against foreign powers
* It answers directly to a legitimate civilian government

No paramilitary group has ever held all these powers, Geoff. Name one that has. You can't, because only military organizations meet these criteria.

Starfleet meets all these criteria. Ergo, Starfleet is a military organization.

I challenge you: Name a paramilitary organization that has or had that level of power and authority, and which is/was set apart from civil jurisprudence. You can't, because no such organization has ever existed.

I challenge you: Show evidence that Starfleet does not meet any or all of the criteria listed above. You can't, because it inarguably does.