Moral debate
- Reliant121
- 3 Star Admiral
- Posts: 12263
- Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:00 pm
Re: Moral debate
I'd morally be...iffy about it but do the "pragmatist thing" and push my nagging moral centre into a box somewhere while I got the job done. One Romulan senator, a few particularly unpleasant looking guards and my conscience are a small price to pay for an incalculable number of sentient throughout 2 quadrants.
-
- Rear Admiral
- Posts: 6026
- Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 2:11 am
- Location: Any ol' place here on Earth or in space. You pick the century and I'll pick the spot
Re: Moral debate
"Garek was right about one thing..."Reliant121 wrote:I'd morally be...iffy about it but do the "pragmatist thing" and push my nagging moral centre into a box somewhere while I got the job done. One Romulan senator, a few particularly unpleasant looking guards and my conscience are a small price to pay for an incalculable number of sentient throughout 2 quadrants.
"All this has happened before --"
"But it doesn't have to happen again. Not if we make up our minds to change. Take a different path. Right here, right now."
"But it doesn't have to happen again. Not if we make up our minds to change. Take a different path. Right here, right now."
Re: Moral debate
I agree that the Tholians and Gorn are nowhere compared to the Feds or the Klingons, but combine the two it would certainly help. It would at least force the Dominion to devote some of their attention away from the main lines.Captain Seafort wrote:Given that their nonagression pacts with the Dominion were treated with concern rather than shrugs or total panic, they (and the Breen for that matter) were probably close to the relative strength of the UK and France today.McAvoy wrote:We don't know about the military might of the other neutral powers like the Tholians or the Gorn
Not just "would have lost" but "were loosing". Remember the casualty lists Sisko was going through, and the fall of Betazed in ITPM.Without them, I think the Feds and the Klingons would have lost the war.
I am not disagreeing with you, but losing a single member planet out of 150 isn't all that bad. It's also war so you are bound to have huge casualty lists. I mean it would be like if the Germans and British were fighting an all out Battle of Jutland every day. Or looking at the casualty lists from the trenches in WW1.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
-
- Rear Admiral
- Posts: 6026
- Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 2:11 am
- Location: Any ol' place here on Earth or in space. You pick the century and I'll pick the spot
Re: Moral debate
I don't think Betazed was the only member planet to fall. Certainly planets and other outposts were being destroyed left and right (hopefully by both sides) during the bits of the war we didn't see in DS9. The impact of Betazed seemed to be that it was a major member planet close to the core, and from there they had access to the other Federation core worlds.McAvoy wrote:I agree that the Tholians and Gorn are nowhere compared to the Feds or the Klingons, but combine the two it would certainly help. It would at least force the Dominion to devote some of their attention away from the main lines.Captain Seafort wrote:Given that their nonagression pacts with the Dominion were treated with concern rather than shrugs or total panic, they (and the Breen for that matter) were probably close to the relative strength of the UK and France today.McAvoy wrote:We don't know about the military might of the other neutral powers like the Tholians or the Gorn
Not just "would have lost" but "were loosing". Remember the casualty lists Sisko was going through, and the fall of Betazed in ITPM.Without them, I think the Feds and the Klingons would have lost the war.
I am not disagreeing with you, but losing a single member planet out of 150 isn't all that bad. It's also war so you are bound to have huge casualty lists. I mean it would be like if the Germans and British were fighting an all out Battle of Jutland every day. Or looking at the casualty lists from the trenches in WW1.
"All this has happened before --"
"But it doesn't have to happen again. Not if we make up our minds to change. Take a different path. Right here, right now."
"But it doesn't have to happen again. Not if we make up our minds to change. Take a different path. Right here, right now."
- Teaos
- 4 Star Admiral
- Posts: 15372
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:00 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award
- Location: Behind you!
Re: Moral debate
To my Knowledge Betazed was the biggest and most important of the Federation member worlds to fall, maybe not the same as the UK or France falling, maybe more like Spain.
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.
-
- Lieutenant Commander
- Posts: 1150
- Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:34 am
- Location: Georgia, United States
- Contact:
Re: Moral debate
The other reason they would need the Romulans, is the Dominion was using Romulan territory to strike at Federation systems. So you have the regular amount of Federation ships on the Romulan border, plus extra ships needed to deal with Dominion raiders.McAvoy wrote:They needed the Romulans. We don't know about the military might of the other neutral powers like the Tholians or the Gorn, bu we do know the Romulans are a superpower comparable to the Federation themselves.
Now the Romulans join the war on your side. You no longer have to post ships to deal with Dominion raiders, freeing them up. You can reduce your strength against the Romulans, as their forces are nominally allied to you and are diverting to the Cardassian border for offensive strikes. You gain the Romulans' support, and the Dominion has to divert ships to protect against Romulan cloaked strikes.
The death of one senator produced major changes on the nature of the Dominion War.
Relativity Calculator
My Nomination for "MVAM Critic Award" (But can it be broken into 3 separate pieces?)
My Nomination for "MVAM Critic Award" (But can it be broken into 3 separate pieces?)
-
- 4 Star Admiral
- Posts: 21747
- Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:38 pm
- Location: Forward Torpedo Tube Twenty. Help!
- Contact:
Re: Moral debate
Vreenak was a smug prick anyways. It's not like some really nice person was killed.Coalition wrote:The death of one senator produced major changes on the nature of the Dominion War.
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
-
- 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: Moral debate
Right, because that's how morality should be defined.Tsukiyumi wrote:Vreenak was a smug prick anyways. It's not like some really nice person was killed.Coalition wrote:The death of one senator produced major changes on the nature of the Dominion War.
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: Moral debate
Just as well it isn't or the casualty rate among us lot would be astronomical.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
- Reliant121
- 3 Star Admiral
- Posts: 12263
- Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:00 pm
Re: Moral debate
Does make you feel SLIGHTLY better bout killing him though.Mikey wrote:Right, because that's how morality should be defined.Tsukiyumi wrote:Vreenak was a smug prick anyways. It's not like some really nice person was killed.Coalition wrote:The death of one senator produced major changes on the nature of the Dominion War.
- Teaos
- 4 Star Admiral
- Posts: 15372
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:00 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award
- Location: Behind you!
Re: Moral debate
Mkaes you feel a lot better about doing it, but that doesnt change morality unfortunatly.
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: Moral debate
Morality is the right of the civilians who damn you after you've done your job. Not the soldier's who defend it and enforce it.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
- Reliant121
- 3 Star Admiral
- Posts: 12263
- Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:00 pm
Re: Moral debate
I'd be quite happy to worry about the morality and hang my head high in shame about it...
AFTER the war has been won.
AFTER the war has been won.
-
- 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: Moral debate
Indeed. I don't think there's any debate over the fact of assassinating someone being wrong; the question is how that compares to letting how many more die by NOT doing performing the assassination.
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
-
- 3 Star Admiral
- Posts: 13039
- Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 5:27 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award, Cochrane Medal of Excellence
- Location: New Hampshire
- Contact:
Re: Moral debate
And in the end, Sisko understood that.Mikey wrote:Indeed. I don't think there's any debate over the fact of assassinating someone being wrong; the question is how that compares to letting how many more die by NOT doing performing the assassination.