www.ditl.org

I think they choose warp drive because with it there culture gets polluted with others. If they invent warp drive and find other civilisations they have corrupted there culture themselves and we are then able to do what we wish. Up to that point the Federation deemed it that we shall not intervine with the natural development of a species.

One funny thing though is the Federation has this rule but I don't see other like the Ferengi giving a shit about it. Anything for money. Why don't we see every under developed species working for them in some way?

So if I see someone who has just been run over by a car I should just leave him lying on the road, right? After all, I have no idea what he might do in the future.

Not really the same thing. For one it is your own species, for two it is only one person not a whole race and three his death or life is most likely irrelevant in the grad scale of things were a whole race dieing out is not. Letting that person live is probably not going to effect the world at whole but letting a race that would naturally die out with out us would.

Teaos wrote:Who are we to play god?

Imagin if a alien species had been watching earth 65 million years ago and decided the Dinosaures were worth saving an thus blasted that Astroid out of the sky. we wouldn't be here now.

No one can see the future. If a race can't save its self it is not for us to save it. Unless its our fault in the first place of corse. But then we are just fixing our mistakes.

Yes, who are we to play God - by deliberately chosing to let an entire species die by refusing to help that's exactly what Picard did. There have been a few times in human history when certain groups have refused to get involved in other peoples business. Rwanda. Srebrenica. Darfur. Sound familiar?

Again not the same thing. They know of us and want our aid. Also we are on most cases indirectly responsible for these situations. A comet heading for a planet or a war that has absolutly nothing to do with us is none of our business.

The Bajorans knew of the Federation and wanted their aid. Gowron knew of the Federation and not only wanted their aid but invoked the Klingon-Federation treaty. In both cases the Federation refused to get involved citing the PD.

I repeat the question I asked ealier in the thread. Would Kirk have stood by?

Did they use the prime directive in the Bajor occupation?

Also Bajor isn't a member of the Federation and the Federation isnt the Alpha quadrant police. Shit happens.

If they had gotten involved it probablt would have lead to war not good for anyone and not really justifiable. And for all we know the Federation did try to help diplomatically. Fact is what other powers do in there own teritory is none of our business.

But again we are off the point. You keep throwing examples that are nothing like the destruction of a race like in TNG.

Teaos wrote:Did they use the prime directive in the Bajor occupation?

Also Bajor isn't a member of the Federation and the Federation isnt the Alpha quadrant police. **** happens.

If they had gotten involved it probablt would have lead to war not good for anyone and not really justifiable. And for all we know the Federation did try to help diplomatically. Fact is what other powers do in there own teritory is none of our business.

At the time the Feds were already in the middle of a war with the Cardies, so lending the Bajorans a hand wouldn't have made much difference. They explicitly refused to help the Bajorans not because of political concerns but because of the PD.

But again we are off the point. You keep throwing examples that are nothing like the destruction of a race like in TNG.

Failing to act to save lives solely because of some rule is moral cowardice, no two ways about it. You say that if a race can't save itself then tough. I say that refusing to save those who you can because you don't want to is tantamount to murdering them yourself.

Captain Seafort wrote: At the time the Feds were already in the middle of a war with the Cardies, so lending the Bajorans a hand wouldn't have made much difference. They explicitly refused to help the Bajorans not because of political concerns but because of the PD.

I think they wanted to avoid the whole "savior syndrom" problem. If the Bajoran could not have been able to save themselves, and had to rely on the Federation to solve their problem, you would create a dependant race, who would think that it is not able to stand on it's own.

Freedom for a race has to be earned, not handed out. The nations that are the most self-reliants are the ones who had to fight for their independance (diplomaticly or military)

SolkaTruesilver wrote:I think they wanted to avoid the whole "savior syndrom" problem. If the Bajoran could not have been able to save themselves, and had to rely on the Federation to solve their problem, you would create a dependant race, who would think that it is not able to stand on it's own.

Freedom for a race has to be earned, not handed out. The nations that are the most self-reliants are the ones who had to fight for their independance (diplomaticly or military)

Would you say that the French, Belgians, Dutch, Danes and Norwegians are entirely dependant on the United States and the United Kingdom? Requiring assistance to kick out a militarily superior occupier does not equate to total reliance on the nation that provides the assistance. In this case, it would be even less so, as the Bajoran resistance proved able to "persuade" the Cardassians to leave even without Federation assistance. While technical support would be required to help rebuild the Bajoran economy post-war, I doubt there's much cause to think that providing such assistance would have led to the Bajorans treating the Federation as a crutch.

SolkaTruesilver wrote:I think they wanted to avoid the whole "savior syndrom" problem. If the Bajoran could not have been able to save themselves, and had to rely on the Federation to solve their problem, you would create a dependant race, who would think that it is not able to stand on it's own.

Freedom for a race has to be earned, not handed out. The nations that are the most self-reliants are the ones who had to fight for their independance (diplomaticly or military)

Would you say that the French, Belgians, Dutch, Danes and Norwegians are entirely dependant on the United States and the United Kingdom? Requiring assistance to kick out a militarily superior occupier does not equate to total reliance on the nation that provides the assistance. In this case, it would be even less so, as the Bajoran resistance proved able to "persuade" the Cardassians to leave even without Federation assistance. While technical support would be required to help rebuild the Bajoran economy post-war, I doubt there's much cause to think that providing such assistance would have led to the Bajorans treating the Federation as a crutch.

Captain Seafort wrote: Would you say that the French, Belgians, Dutch, Danes and Norwegians are entirely dependant on the United States and the United Kingdom? Requiring assistance to kick out a militarily superior occupier does not equate to total reliance on the nation that provides the assistance. In this case, it would be even less so, as the Bajoran resistance proved able to "persuade" the Cardassians to leave even without Federation assistance. While technical support would be required to help rebuild the Bajoran economy post-war, I doubt there's much cause to think that providing such assistance would have led to the Bajorans treating the Federation as a crutch.

Sadly, you exemple doesn't count. Bajor has been under the occupation for 50 years, and their whole society/culture were now based upon resistance against the cardassian. The countries you named had been under Nazi occupation (oh s****. I DON'T WANT TO HIT GODWIN'S LAW), for about 4-5-6+ years. No so much of a change

Now compare this to India Vs Great Britain. Indians had to fight for their independance. The influence on their culture wasn't that big (compared to the Bajorans), but if GB simply awaked one morning and told them "ok. We leave, here are the keys to your country", I am pretty sure the Indian nationalism wouldn't be as strong as it is today..

SolkaTruesilver wrote:Sadly, you exemple doesn't count. Bajor has been under the occupation for 50 years, and their whole society/culture were now based upon resistance against the cardassian. The countries you named had been under Nazi occupation (oh s****. I DON'T WANT TO HIT GODWIN'S LAW), for about 4-5-6+ years. No so much of a change

Even better. Since the Bajorans had been fighting the Cardies for decades, and their society had improved tremendously as a result of having to organise around the resitance, they weren't about to let the Federation take over as the resident puppetmaster, regardless of any assistance provided.

And I don't think Godwin's Law applies when we're taking about pretty stereotypical Space Nazis.

Now compare this to India Vs Great Britain. Indians had to fight for their independance. The influence on their culture wasn't that big (compared to the Bajorans), but if GB simply awaked one morning and told them "ok. We leave, here are the keys to your country", I am pretty sure the Indian nationalism wouldn't be as strong as it is today.

British influence on Indian culture was pretty extensive - the prohibition on suttee being one of the major points. As for fighting for independance, other than Gandhi's non-violent protests I don't recall reading anything about Indian armed resistance to British rule. The colonial government had been following a policy of Indianisation for decades before the official handover, and the intention was to turn India into a self-governing Dominion along the lines of Canada, Australia, NZ and South Africa. Most of the serious drama was the Hindu-Muslim fighting that led to the splitting of the country. However, the Indian Independance movement isn't my strong point. In practice I'm not sure what your point is WRT the Bajorans - "we're off, you sort the mess out" was effectively what the Cardies said when they left.

Once again, back to the topic at hand (though I do love debating on what the British did to India...)

35) The Magnificent Ferengi

36) the TR-116 and the other cool weapons we saw.

Truely the coolest weapon in Trek.

37) The Sword of Kahless