www.ditl.org

Sure. The Klingon Kmpire afraid of some vulcan hippies.

And how would Klingons expand their territory if a bunch of Vulcans kept them at bay just about one light year away from earth, because if they didn't the Klingons would have simply flown around - and we remember... there are no stars at this distance from sol. Not in our universe and not in the ST-universe.

The vulcans were anything BUT hippies during ENT. They openly waged pre-emptive war against the Andorians, were completely unfazed in attacking a fleet of Mazarite ships each of whom were superior to a NX with ONE SHIP. I think a Sh'raan would be a healthy match for a Klingon battlecruiser.

Where did you get this "1 lightyear" from anyway? And the klingons can expand in every other direction. theres plenty of space to conquer.

Reliant121 wrote:Where did you get this "1 lightyear" from anyway?

From Enterprise's pilot episode; they say the trip will take four days at warp 5. By GK's calculations, that would put the Klingon homeworld about 1 LY from Earth...

Somebody forgot their calculator when they wrote that dialogue.

That's from the pilot where we discover that the Klingon homeworld is only four days away at warp 4 (ish), apparently it works out that their capital is only a lightyear away.

You don't see Starfleet positioning dozens of ships around Vulcan and Earth for the same reason you don't see the US armed forces positioning four or five supercarriers and a couple hundred thousand ground troops in and around NYC.

Good point.

Because they would be of no use there...

...just running costs.

Tsukiyumi wrote:

Reliant121 wrote:Where did you get this "1 lightyear" from anyway?

From Enterprise's pilot episode; they say the trip will take four days at warp 5. By GK's calculations, that would put the Klingon homeworld about 1 LY from Earth...

Somebody forgot their calculator when they wrote that dialogue.

ah, okay. I haven't seen that.

I Am Spartacus wrote:You don't see Starfleet positioning dozens of ships around Vulcan and Earth for the same reason you don't see the US armed forces positioning four or five supercarriers and a couple hundred thousand ground troops in and around NYC.

One key difference there is that we know where every ship on earth is, and no one could just appear with little or no warning in New York harbor. The naval analogy doesn't really work there.

One key difference there is that we know where every ship on earth is, and no one could just appear with little or no warning in New York harbor. The naval analogy doesn't really work there.

What about subs?

Tsukiyumi wrote: One key difference there is that we know where every ship on earth is, and no one could just appear with little or no warning in New York harbor. The naval analogy doesn't really work there.

As we have seen with the freighter "Arctic Sea"...

We only know of the positions if the possessing country gives information to its allies. There is a lot of water surface that is not controlled 24/7 (about 350,000,000 km²). And there are also submarines as already mentioned.

Tsukiyumi wrote:

I Am Spartacus wrote:You don't see Starfleet positioning dozens of ships around Vulcan and Earth for the same reason you don't see the US armed forces positioning four or five supercarriers and a couple hundred thousand ground troops in and around NYC.

One key difference there is that we know where every ship on earth is, and no one could just appear with little or no warning in New York harbor. The naval analogy doesn't really work there.

I don't think I communicated the analogy clearly enough. I was saying that there is no need for Starfleet to position its forces in and around the core industrial worlds, as these are the places least likely to see conflict (until they hired idiots to write for J.J. Abrams, of course). There's no need for the Federation to protect Earth or Vulcan from conventional military attack, just like there's no need for the USA to protect New York from conventional military attack.

Avatar2312 wrote:As we have seen with the freighter "Arctic Sea"...

Sorry, I should've specified "every warship".

I Am Spartacus wrote:I don't think I communicated the analogy clearly enough.

Yeah, I must have misunderstood that.

I Am Spartacus wrote:...I was saying that there is no need for Starfleet to position its forces in and around the core industrial worlds, as these are the places least likely to see conflict (until they hired idiots to write for J.J. Abrams, of course). There's no need for the Federation to protect Earth or Vulcan from conventional military attack, just like there's no need for the USA to protect New York from conventional military attack.

It's not like the Borg, or the Breen, or the Xindi were able to attack Earth...

...None of which happened thanks to the franchise reboot!

Sorry, I should've specified "every warship".

Does this include submarines?

Never mind "does it include submarines" - I'd like to see some evidence that it's true at all.