Faults of The Sisko
- Deepcrush
- 4 Star Admiral
- Posts: 18917
- Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
- Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA
Faults of The Sisko
We constantly talk about how badass the Sisko is... and rightfully so. What doesn't get covered is the line of faults he seems to trail.
First fault on my mind being his handling of the Klingon invasion of the Cardassian Union. He betrayed and opened fired on his own allies in support of his enemies. This is insane to me to say the least and I supported his Bio-bombing that Maquis world. I can understand the UFP condemning the attack and giving a stink face about it. But destroying your allies ships to save your enemy who will likely (and in fact did) just turn on you and try to kill you anyways is just stupid. What's worse to me is the Janeway attitude that Sisko had during the thing. Treating it like it was the Klingon's fault he decided to betray them. A total reverse as it was the Klingons, even after suffering losses, who tried to resolve the matter peacefully.
Anyone else?
First fault on my mind being his handling of the Klingon invasion of the Cardassian Union. He betrayed and opened fired on his own allies in support of his enemies. This is insane to me to say the least and I supported his Bio-bombing that Maquis world. I can understand the UFP condemning the attack and giving a stink face about it. But destroying your allies ships to save your enemy who will likely (and in fact did) just turn on you and try to kill you anyways is just stupid. What's worse to me is the Janeway attitude that Sisko had during the thing. Treating it like it was the Klingon's fault he decided to betray them. A total reverse as it was the Klingons, even after suffering losses, who tried to resolve the matter peacefully.
Anyone else?
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
- Graham Kennedy
- Site Admin
- Posts: 11561
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:28 pm
- Location: Banbury, UK
- Contact:
Re: Faults of The Sisko
I'd say you pretty much nailed his worst failing on the Cardassian/Klingon thing. Provoking a war with your closest ally to protect one of your enemies, all against direct orders of the civilian government? Outright treason.
I wasn't fond of his decision to go off on a sulk and peel potatoes in the middle of a war, either.
I wasn't fond of his decision to go off on a sulk and peel potatoes in the middle of a war, either.
Give a man a fire, and you keep him warm for a day. SET a man on fire, and you will keep him warm for the rest of his life...
- Deepcrush
- 4 Star Admiral
- Posts: 18917
- Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
- Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA
Re: Faults of The Sisko
To be fair, the constant strain he was under will wear anyone out over time. Everyone needs to take a break to sort things out.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
-
- Fleet Admiral
- Posts: 35635
- Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award
- Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
- Contact:
Re: Faults of The Sisko
True, but there's a proper time and place.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
- Teaos
- 4 Star Admiral
- Posts: 15368
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:00 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award
- Location: Behind you!
Re: Faults of The Sisko
There is never a proper time to have a break down...
What does defeat mean to you?
Nothing it will never come. Death before defeat. I don’t bend or break. I end, if I meet a foe capable of it. Victory is in forcing the opponent to back down. I do not. There is no defeat.
Nothing it will never come. Death before defeat. I don’t bend or break. I end, if I meet a foe capable of it. Victory is in forcing the opponent to back down. I do not. There is no defeat.
- Deepcrush
- 4 Star Admiral
- Posts: 18917
- Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
- Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA
Re: Faults of The Sisko
Fight through a war that involves a quarter of the known galaxy and you have a right to break down.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
Re: Faults of The Sisko
Actually if you read or watch any interviews with soldiers/sailors/marines back in WW1 and WW2, basically you do get a break from war. My guess is that Sisko requested it and UFP accepted it.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
- Graham Kennedy
- Site Admin
- Posts: 11561
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:28 pm
- Location: Banbury, UK
- Contact:
Re: Faults of The Sisko
Seems to be a thing in Starfleet that people very rarely take leave. We're often told that the main characters almost never go on leave, that they have loads of leave accumulated, etc.
Give a man a fire, and you keep him warm for a day. SET a man on fire, and you will keep him warm for the rest of his life...
-
- Fleet Admiral
- Posts: 35635
- Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award
- Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
- Contact:
Re: Faults of The Sisko
They have holodecks. If that sort of thing were available on a modern naval ship, for instance, it wouldn't be a total substitute for leave... but it would drastically reduce the amount of leave necessary to keep a man's head in the game.
I do think that the issue with Sisko's case is that of the timing of his leave, and his general tendency to take a destroyer escort attached to his station and run it around the quadrant like it's his project 1963 Barracuda.
I do think that the issue with Sisko's case is that of the timing of his leave, and his general tendency to take a destroyer escort attached to his station and run it around the quadrant like it's his project 1963 Barracuda.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
- Captain Seafort
- 4 Star Admiral
- Posts: 15548
- Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
- Location: Blighty
Re: Faults of The Sisko
His response to the Klingon-Cardassian war was very poor judgement, but his specific use of the Defiant's cloak was even worse. It was in direct contravention of the amended Treaty of Algeron, and as such could have wrecked the improving Fed-Romulan relations just as they were preparing to face a Dominion invasion. It risked dropping the Federation into three simultaneous wars against the Dominion and the two other great powers of the Alpha Quadrant.
On top of that, of course, there's his stunt in "For the Uniform". Yes, the Maquis in general and Eddington in particular were a serious threat that had to be dealt with. This does not in any way excuse or justify the Halabja school of counterinsurgency.
On top of that, of course, there's his stunt in "For the Uniform". Yes, the Maquis in general and Eddington in particular were a serious threat that had to be dealt with. This does not in any way excuse or justify the Halabja school of counterinsurgency.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
- Deepcrush
- 4 Star Admiral
- Posts: 18917
- Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
- Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA
Re: Faults of The Sisko
With Eddington, if it were the UFP's job to handle everything then I can look at Sisko's actions and think "Well they didn't have a choice". But with the Cardassians being there, if I were the UFP I would have just told the CU they have 30 days and go at it.
I don't want anyone thinking I approve of the UFP turning its back on its own people. But once you've gone that route, you need to stick to it. If the Maquis want a fight with the CU, let them have it.
I don't want anyone thinking I approve of the UFP turning its back on its own people. But once you've gone that route, you need to stick to it. If the Maquis want a fight with the CU, let them have it.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
- Captain Seafort
- 4 Star Admiral
- Posts: 15548
- Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
- Location: Blighty
Re: Faults of The Sisko
No. Use of CBW against a purely civilian target is never acceptable, regardless of the provocation.Deepcrush wrote:With Eddington, if it were the UFP's job to handle everything then I can look at Sisko's actions and think "Well they didn't have a choice".
Agreed. Especially as the UFP didn't abandon it's people - the Cardassians fought them to a stalemate and they were therefore forced to agree to an exchange of territory. They attempted to evacuate their people from the planets to be handed over. The colonists explicitly and repeatedly stated that they did not wish to be removed, and were willing to be annexed by the Cardassians in order to stay put. At that point they ceased to be Federation citizens and became Cardassian citizens (i.e. not the Feds problem any more). The Feds involvement is akin to the Mexican army tramping all over Texas to put down an anti-US insurrection.I don't want anyone thinking I approve of the UFP turning its back on its own people. But once you've gone that route, you need to stick to it. If the Maquis want a fight with the CU, let them have it.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
- Deepcrush
- 4 Star Admiral
- Posts: 18917
- Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
- Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA
Re: Faults of The Sisko
It wasn't purely civilian, it was a Maquis planet which means to me it is acceptable.Captain Seafort wrote:No. Use of CBW against a purely civilian target is never acceptable, regardless of the provocation.
The UFP first off shouldn't have left them there. If the people wanted to stay or not doesn't matter. They need to leave for their own safety and the UFP left them there. Also, you shouldn't have signed a treaty that grants territory in a stalemate. In my view, the UFP willingly abandoned its people to preserve the illusion of utopia on Earth.Captain Seafort wrote:Agreed. Especially as the UFP didn't abandon it's people - the Cardassians fought them to a stalemate and they were therefore forced to agree to an exchange of territory. They attempted to evacuate their people from the planets to be handed over. The colonists explicitly and repeatedly stated that they did not wish to be removed, and were willing to be annexed by the Cardassians in order to stay put. At that point they ceased to be Federation citizens and became Cardassian citizens (i.e. not the Feds problem any more). The Feds involvement is akin to the Mexican army tramping all over Texas to put down an anti-US insurrection.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
Re: Faults of The Sisko
I often wondered....HOW could the UFP get battled to a stalemate with the Klingons as allies by the Cardassians?????
They say that in the Army,
the women are mighty fine.
They look like Phyllis Diller,
and walk like Frankenstein.
the women are mighty fine.
They look like Phyllis Diller,
and walk like Frankenstein.
- Tinadrin Chelnor
- Lieutenant Commander
- Posts: 934
- Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 3:11 am
- Location: Pendroca IV
Re: Faults of The Sisko
I agree with Seafort that Maquis presence or not, does not justify using CWB in any circumstance.
On the colonists on worlds within the DMZ that transferred to Cardassian territory, I think firstly that the Federation should never have agreed to hand over worlds where its people had already established their homes, obviously there must have been some strategic value in doing so I would guess, but surely the government's prime concern is the protection of its citizens and their homes.
Once they had agreed to transfer ownership of these worlds though, they were right in not forcing their citizens to leave, and allow them to become citizens of the Cardassian Union, but should have left the Cardassians to deal with them, rather than intervene. If the Cardassians had simply left them alone, perhaps just collecting taxes/mining resources where necessary, then the Maquis probably wouldn't have arisen.
On the colonists on worlds within the DMZ that transferred to Cardassian territory, I think firstly that the Federation should never have agreed to hand over worlds where its people had already established their homes, obviously there must have been some strategic value in doing so I would guess, but surely the government's prime concern is the protection of its citizens and their homes.
Once they had agreed to transfer ownership of these worlds though, they were right in not forcing their citizens to leave, and allow them to become citizens of the Cardassian Union, but should have left the Cardassians to deal with them, rather than intervene. If the Cardassians had simply left them alone, perhaps just collecting taxes/mining resources where necessary, then the Maquis probably wouldn't have arisen.
"No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever. There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom. Against that power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand."