Insurrection

[Captain Seafort]

Most of the time a treaty is there to avoid war.

What was that in answer to?

I reiterate: we have never heard so much as a peep about Romulan obligations under the Treaty of Algeron, and were the Romulans to discover the Feds to be in breach of it the worst case scenario would be their withdrawal from the alliance.

[Blackstar the Chakat]

The Romulans must do something big for the Federation to give up the advantage of cloaking technology.

worst case scenario would be their withdrawal from the alliance

Actually worst case scenario would be a full scale war. There would probably have to be some other tensions for that to happen though.

[Captain Seafort]

The Romulans must do something big for the Federation to give up the advantage of cloaking technology.

Just like the allies made huge sacrifices at the Treaty of Versailles? All we know about Tomed and Algeron is that the former cost thousands of lives, and the latter banned the Feds from developing or using cloaking technology, with no apparent Romulan obligations. This evidence strongly suggests that the Feds got a kicking.

[Deepcrush]

Most likely a Draw in which the Romulans held enough sway to enforce a treaty but not enough to destroy the UFP.

[Captain Seafort]

Cloaking tech represents an enormous strategic and operational level advantage when one side possesses it and the other doesn't. I can't see the Feds willingly surrendering it unless the alternative was their utter destruction.

The Romulans are aggressive, but they've generally seemed to prefer manipulating the balance of power than outright conflict, and they may well have considered the Federation's survival, even badly weakened, to be important in maintaining a triangular power structure in the quadrant.

[Deepcrush]

Thats a strong point but I feel that the Romulans would look for the best way to maintain their power as well. At the time they still have fair relations with the Klingons which should have aloud them to wash the UFP if your case was so.

The UFP has also shown that its thoughts for war ended with kirk's retirement. When the Treaty with the Klingons was signed they may have felt it wasn't such a needed thing. Plus the Excelsiors were well above the Romulan ship of the time. Spocks modified PT also removed much of the use for cloaks.

I will agree with you strongly that the UFP wouldn't have given up such rights without reason. Hense why my thought was to a draw. Both sides wanted out of the war and the UFP gave what at the time may have been a token settlement to the Romulans. The Romulans don't seem to pay much attention to the UFP so they stopped fighting over the border worlds. It seems to fit well with what we know (that isn't much sadly).

I would think both our ideas are possible in equal measure.

[Captain Seafort]

Thats a strong point but I feel that the Romulans would look for the best way to maintain their power as well. At the time they still have fair relations with the Klingons which should have aloud them to wash the UFP if your case was so.

At the time of the Khitomer Accords the Romulans appeared to be close Federation allies, and were advocating a Fed-Klingon war, while by the time of their attack on Khitomer they'd become Klingon allies. They flip-flop around depend on what they consider to be in their best interests.

The Romulans also like to consider long-term strategy, and their penchant for attacking their allies would make them cautious of tying themselves to a single power, as the destruction of the Federation would.

Triangular power structures tend to be more stable in the long-term, as any power growing out of control can be countered by two others which are together capable of defeating it. I can well imagine the omulans wishing to perpetuate such a structure.

The UFP has also shown that its thoughts for war ended with kirk's retirement. When the Treaty with the Klingons was signed they may have felt it wasn't such a needed thing. Plus the Excelsiors were well above the Romulan ship of the time. Spock's modified PT also removed much of the use for cloaks.

While I agree with the first point, the others I don't. The Excelsior was a quarter of a century old by the time of Tomed - more than long enough for the Romulans to have deployed a counter. Indeed, by that point the Ambassador was probably in development, and the Romulan attack may have been intended in part to forestall her deployment.

As for Spock's torpedo modifications, while they were effective against Chang's BoP, their lack of use in TNG and later tells us that a counter had been developed, and since the Battle of Khitomer was almost two decades past by the time of Tomed, it's easily conceivable that those countermeasures had already been developed.

[Graham Kennedy]

The thing that bothered me about the cloak was, well, why bother with it? There's only 600 Ba'ku, all in one village. Why not just park the ship a thousand miles away? They'd never know, you wouldn't have to fool with illegal stuff at all.

The only answer I can think of is that the cloak was not there to hide the ship from the Ba'ku. It's doubtful that it was there to hide it from the Son'a. So I can only imagine it was there to hide the ship from Federation - specifically Starfleet - people.

Which really does make some sense. The Starfleeters on the project all seemed to be in on what was happening, but it's pretty clear that the Federation at large was not. Personally I doubt the project was legal. Why hide it otherwise?

[Deepcrush]

At the time of the Khitomer Accords the Romulans appeared to be close Federation allies, and were advocating a Fed-Klingon war, while by the time of their attack on Khitomer they'd become Klingon allies. They flip-flop around depend on what they consider to be in their best interests.

The Romulans also like to consider long-term strategy, and their penchant for attacking their allies would make them cautious of tying themselves to a single power, as the destruction of the Federation would.

Triangular power structures tend to be more stable in the long-term, as any power growing out of control can be countered by two others which are together capable of defeating it. I can well imagine the omulans wishing to perpetuate such a structure.

This is a solid form of thought and only a fool would try to say otherwise.

I still must maintain that with the Klingons split on either war or peace, that would have been the proper time to strike. The klingons would have broken against starfleet but starfleet would also have fallen as I doubt it could have withstood both the RSE and the KDF at the same time. This would have left the Romulans as the sole power of the three.

While I agree with the first point, the others I don't. The Excelsior was a quarter of a century old by the time of Tomed - more than long enough for the Romulans to have deployed a counter. Indeed, by that point the Ambassador was probably in development, and the Romulan attack may have been intended in part to forestall her deployment.

As for Spock's torpedo modifications, while they were effective against Chang's BoP, their lack of use in TNG and later tells us that a counter had been developed, and since the Battle of Khitomer was almost two decades past by the time of Tomed, it's easily conceivable that those countermeasures had already been developed.

True enough but as we know, ships in startrek have a very long life span. Also the Excelsior seemed to be pretty far ahead of its time. THe romulans were behind in front line ships and Starfleet had shown that they could 'at the time' bypass the cloak. No doubt this changed over time.

[Captain Seafort]

The thing that bothered me about the cloak was, well, why bother with it? There's only 600 Ba'ku, all in one village. Why not just park the ship a thousand miles away? They'd never know, you wouldn't have to fool with illegal stuff at all.

Or simply park it in orbit. The Ba'ku never realised the Son'a command ship was there, so why would they notice the holoship?

It's possible that due either to the fancy transporter-blocking rock, or the general conditions in the Patch, the holoship had to be extremely close to the village to mass-beam the B'ku as had been planned.

Which really does make some sense. The Starfleeters on the project all seemed to be in on what was happening, but it's pretty clear that the Federation at large was not. Personally I doubt the project was legal. Why hide it otherwise?

Dougherty's comments suggested to me that the Fed Council authorised the entire operation. I think it's more likely that either details of the operation had been hidden from them, or that the decision had been made by an inner groups of the council - to use a UN analogy, the Security Council knew, but the General Assembly didn't.

[Deepcrush]

Dougherty's comments suggested to me that the Fed Council authorised the entire operation. I think it's more likely that either details of the operation had been hidden from them, or that the decision had been made by an inner groups of the council - to use a UN analogy, the Security Council knew, but the General Assembly didn't.

I like this idea. It sounds very much like something I would have done.

"Hey! You can't do thaty!"

"To late... I already did... And I had permission"

[Blackstar the Chakat]

The thing that bothered me about the cloak was, well, why bother with it? There's only 600 Ba'ku, all in one village. Why not just park the ship a thousand miles away? They'd never know, you wouldn't have to fool with illegal stuff at all.

I think I mentioned this on the last page.

[Graham Kennedy]

Dougherty's comments suggested to me that the Fed Council authorised the entire operation.

Yes, but Picard's response was to wonder how that was even possible. Although it's not really fleshed out, the way I read the movie was that the Council's approval of the mission was illegal. Think Watergate-style "Oh my god, the council did WHAT?" stuff. Hence the need for secrecy.

I think it's more likely that either details of the operation had been hidden from them, or that the decision had been made by an inner groups of the council - to use a UN analogy, the Security Council knew, but the General Assembly didn't.

Yeah, I had that thought too. It's not unusual for a ruling body to function in large part through committees. Maybe some such body (Foreign Affairs?) approved the operation despite the illegality, and the main council either didn't know or put it through on the nod without realising the details.

Either way, I don't think it can possibly have been an everyday open decision. If it was the public would already know, and so why would the Picard's efforts to alert them amount to anything? "The Ba'ku are being displaced!" "Yeah, we know. So what?"

The whole point of the end of the movie was that public disclosure would delay and/or end the project. That only makes sense if the project was totally beyond acceptability for the average joe in the street.

[Captain Seafort]

Yes, but Picard's response was to wonder how that was even possible. Although it's not really fleshed out, the way I read the movie was that the Council's approval of the mission was illegal. Think Watergate-style "Oh my god, the council did WHAT?" stuff. Hence the need for secrecy.

Picard has a track record of being somewaht idealistic. Take "I, Borg" for example - due to his personal sense of morality, he put Hugh's welfare above that of the Federation, and Nechayev later gave him a rifting for it.

Either way, I don't think it can possibly have been an everyday open decision. If it was the public would already know, and so why would the Picard's efforts to alert them amount to anything? "The Ba'ku are being displaced!" "Yeah, we know. So what?"

The whole point of the end of the movie was that public disclosure would delay and/or end the project. That only makes sense if the project was totally beyond acceptability for the average joe in the street.

I find whole thing was similar in some respects to the US bombing of Laos and Cambodia in the late 60s/early 70s. Plenty of evidence that it was the correct course of action, but the average Joe went ballistic over it.

[Graham Kennedy]

Picard has a track record of being somewaht idealistic. Take "I, Borg" for example - due to his personal sense of morality, he put Hugh's welfare above that of the Federation, and Nechayev later gave him a rifting for it.

Yes he does. But then he also has the reputation of being one of the most highly respected captains in Starfleet. Captain of the flagship and all.

I find whole thing was similar in some respects to the US bombing of Laos and Cambodia in the late 60s/early 70s. Plenty of evidence that it was the correct course of action, but the average Joe went ballistic over it.

Bombing was the correct course, or bombing without telling anybody was? Slight difference there! People tend to get a bit twitchy when their government goes to war without at least telling them.