Sovereign class

Post by **Mikey** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 4:46 pm

Do you put your daughter in a car? She has more chance of dying in a car crash than she does in a starship.

That wouldn't be true if there were as many people traveling by starship daily as by car.

Thorin · Post by **Thorin** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 6:12 pm

It would, though. Like planes are safer than cars, yadda yadda.

I don't see the problem with civilians on science ships. Even though Galaxy class ships may sometimes be called to battle or dangerous situations, you can't always offload the civilians.
In wartime, though, they clearly were. The Galaxy class ships were science/explorer vessels, really everyone's arguement has been supporting this - that half the ship is taken up by "needless" science stuff. It's a flying city! Just because it has defences doesn't mean its a warship and meant to be going into dangerous situations every week to please the watching audiences.

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 6:18 pm

True, the fact that it's armed does not automatically make it a warship. The fact that it is always the Enterprise that gets ordered to a trouble spot with there's a fight brewing does make it a warship.

Thorin · Post by **Thorin** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 6:26 pm

No it doesn't. A warship is a ship designed to fight in war - while in wartime, the Galaxy class starship never carries a civilian complement!

It is not a ship designed for war - that doesn't, obviously, stop is fighting in a war.

Regarding the safety of civilians, though; there are modern day examples. Army bases in foreign countries. They always have their family there, and yet it is a military place that is meant to defend a set area and allow things to be "investigated"; meaning it is also under some risk. This is almost exactly the same as having family aboard starships.

Post by **Mikey** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 6:43 pm

It's not quite the same - an army base itself can't be ordered to a hot spot or front line. Just because those fires that a ship may be asked to put out aren't occuring during a prolonged, declared war, doesn't mean that they are any less violent or don't have the same potential to cause casualties.

The U.S. never declared war during the Viet Nam "police action" - should we have sent soldiers' families there along with each tour of duty?

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 6:48 pm

No it doesn't. A warship is a ship designed to fight in war - while in wartime, the Galaxy class starship never carries a civilian complement!

It is not a ship designed for war - that doesn't, obviously, stop is fighting in a war.

Whether it's a well designed warship or not is irrelevent. When fighting breaks out or threatains to break out the Galaxys drop what they're doing and go to fight. This demonstrates that their primary purpose is to defend the Federation - ie they're warships. If it were not, they would carry on exploring, or looking at stars, or whatever else they were doing.

Regarding the safety of civilians, though; there are modern day examples. Army bases in foreign countries. They always have their family there, and yet it is a military place that is meant to defend a set area and allow things to be "investigated"; meaning it is also under some risk. This is almost exactly the same as having family aboard starships.

It's nothing like the Federation's stupid policy. When military personnel are deployed to a warzone they do not take their families with them. When they are deployed aboard ship they do not take their families with them. The closest modern militaries have ever come to the sort of "families in warzones" philosophy of the Feds is in Germany, where families do go out when individuals are posted there. Slight difference though - that wasn't a warzone. It was a country that would have been on the front line had WW3 broken out, but it ws, by and large, quiet.

Thorin · Post by **Thorin** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 6:50 pm

Mikey wrote: The U.S. never declared war during the Viet Nam "police action" - should we have sent soldiers' families there along with each tour of duty?

I'm not familiar with whatever happened there.

In a lot of the situations, where could the civilians have been offloaded to? Even earth got a Breen bashing. In the Best of Both Worlds, where could they have gone? Was anywhere really safer than the Enterprise?

And your true in saying that the military bases aren't on the frontline, but neither are starships. Or rather there not meant to be. Just like military bases aren't meant to be on the frontline, but if they started getting attacked then they would be.

Thorin · Post by **Thorin** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 6:52 pm

Captain Seafort wrote:[When military personnel are deployed to a warzone they do not take their families with them. When they are deployed aboard ship they do not take their families with them. The closest modern militaries have ever come to the sort of "families in warzones" philosophy of the Feds is in Germany, where families do go out when individuals are posted there. Slight difference though - that wasn't a warzone. It was a country that would have been on the front line had WW3 broken out, but it ws, by and large, quiet.

You've perfectly illustrated my point - it wasn't during a war.

Civilians on starships were not there during wartime. Only during peacetime.

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 7:01 pm

Thorin wrote:You've perfectly illustrated my point - it wasn't during a war.

Civilians on starships were not there during wartime. Only during peacetime.

Ahem

I wrote:[When military personnel are deployed to a warzone they do not take their families with them. When they are deployed aboard ship they do not take their families with them. The closest modern militaries have ever come to the sort of "families in warzones" philosophy of the Feds is in Germany, where families do go out when individuals are posted there. Slight difference though - that wasn't a warzone. It was a country that would have been on the front line had WW3 broken out, but it ws, by and large, quiet.

Important bit highlighted.

Also, having families staying on-base or in familly quarters is different to dragging them along with you on a patrol along the IGB (for example). That would be closer to what the Feds do.

Thorin · Post by **Thorin** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 7:11 pm

But starships are not navy-warships! When deployed on warships, they should not bring their family along. When deployed on starships not meant to go into war, what is wrong with bringing their families?
You're drawing parallels with today that cannot be made. There is no modern day "exploratory-science-military" organisation.

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 7:17 pm

Thorin wrote:But starships are not navy-warships! When deployed on warships, they should not bring their family along. When deployed on starships not meant to go into war, what is wrong with bringing their families?
You're drawing parallels with today that cannot be made. There is no modern day "exploratory-science-military" organisation.

*Sigh*

I, earlier wrote:Whether it's a well designed warship or not is irrelevent. When fighting breaks out or threatains to break out the Galaxys drop what they're doing and go to fight. This demonstrates that their primary purpose is to defend the Federation - ie they're warships. If it were not, they would carry on exploring, or looking at stars, or whatever else they were doing.

Incidentally, Starfleet's combined military/exploration-science role does have precedent in the 18th/19th century Royal Navy. Cook's expedition to the Pacific was under RN auspices, and Darwin travelled to the Galapagos aboard HMS Beagle. Would you assert, using this evidence, that the Royal Navy was not a military organisation?

Thorin · Post by **Thorin** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 7:43 pm

You are now arguing that Starfleet is a military organisation first, and we all know its not. We've been told it so many times. You say that because the Royal Navy, a military department, once explorered the rest of the world, you believe that Starfleet is a military department and that now and again it explores. We've been told this is not the case goodness knows how many times.

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 8:06 pm

Yes, we've been told that Starfleet is not military many times. That does not change the fact that when the Federation is attacked it is Starfleet that defends it. Therefore Stafleet is the Federation's military. Calling a spade a bucket does not make it one.

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 8:34 pm

When the Federation is under attack Starfleet responds. Cannon.
Starfleet ships patrol the border. Cannon.
Starfleet ships are always called in to deal with external or internal threats. Cannon.
Starfleet builds vessels dedicated for war. Cannon.

Whatever Starfleet says, it is a military force.

Deepcrush · Post by **Deepcrush** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 8:56 pm

Agreed, but they don't like to think so. So they give them junk!