www.ditl.org

Captain Seafort wrote:I would say it does, if you define that as being specifically equipped for the purpose of finding and destroying the enemy.

Then on this point we disagree. Simply being equipped is not enough in my view, it is a matter of the purpose of the design.

One possible solution is that every single Starfleet ship is an AMC, with weapons permanently attached.

It could work something like this: under most circumstances they would be operating under the auspices of whatever civilian organisation is responsible for exploration, science, technological evaluation, etc. There is a clause, however that allows the military wing of Starfleet to take control of the ship and order it to patrol the Neutral Zone, or fight off the latest Borg attack. This would explain the ship's poor design as a warship, and the crew's repeated insistence that Starfleet isn't military (despite being the people who fight to defend the Federation when the fighting starts) - they really aren't a professional military, they're just civvies with a bit of military training thrown in as an afterthought. It would also explain the Federation's non-existent ground army - it's a lot easier to train professional seamen into naval personnel (especially if firing a weapon just involves pushing buttons rather than physically loading it) than it is to train a decent soldier.

An interesting theory, Seafort. It seems to fit the facts and also explains Picards coment that tactics are deemed unimportant.

Its a completely stupid way of doing things, but then again its hardly the stupidest thing that Starfleets ever done.

But as I said before, if you had a science vessel with a couple of add ons that made it the equal of a warship, that doesn't make it a warship itself.

You are indeed right there Graham. I guess it all comes down to personal opinion though.

Thats about it then. The Federation confronted with a time of prolonged peace has decided to reliagte its military to second tier behind the science rolls. Now it is switching back again.

Good. The Federation is lucky its policy worked for them this time around.

I hate to play devil's advocate (actually, I rather enjoy it ) but I'm thinking of a fly in the ointment with this last theory. It does explain a lot of just plain dumb stuff... however, if

under most circumstances they would be operating under the auspices of whatever civilian organisation is responsible for exploration, science, technological evaluation, etc.

... then why do all those officers have to come out of a FULL TOUR at Starfleet Adademy?

Because... well... SHUT UP!!

Do we know exactly what a full tour involves for them?

It could be quite different to what we think it is or is today.

Its not just officers, all crewmembers went to the acadamy.

Rochey wrote:Its not just officers, all crewmembers went to the acadamy.

Isn't the point of enlisted crewmembers that they didn't go to the Academy? Or had a "crash course" by Starfleet. To be an officer you must have gone through the academy - just like in modern day militaries. Non commisioned/enlisted ranks are there for people who haven't gone through the academy but are a part of Starfleet. Just like sergeants, corporals etc.

I know that. However, it was stated in one episode that all crewmembers went to the acadamy, however stupid that may be, it is, unfortunately, cannon.

That is idoitic. The only thing I can think they mean is they have a "crash course" in it. Something like a 6 month training period where they train up in their particular area rather than in everything.
If enlisted crewmemebers went through the full academy then they would no longer be enlisted and would be commisioned. Thus enlisted crewmembers could not exist, if every crew member is required to go through the full academy.
Nice writing from the technical team as usual.

That is idoitic.

I agree entirely. My father is in the military, and he found this to be incredibly stupid, as he mentioned to me several times.

The only thing I can think they mean is they have a "crash course" in it. Something like a 6 month training period where they train up in their particular area rather than in everything.

I hope thats what they do. But would it really surprise you if they didn't?

If enlisted crewmemebers went through the full academy then they would no longer be enlisted and would be commisioned. Thus enlisted crewmembers could not exist, if every crew member is required to go through the full academy.

I know. Does Trek not have any military consultants? I know most sci-fi shows have.

Nice writing from the technical team as usual.

Just the tip of the iceberg.

I was always under the impression that enlisted just had "Basic training"

But I usually try to find ways in my head to make things less idiotic so I don't know if thats real or just me making it up.

Unofrtunately, no. I believe the quote I vaguely remember came from O'Brien. He stated, IIRC, that all of the crew went to the acadamy.

Do we know exactly what a full tour involves for them?

I believe its been mentioned onscreen that completing the Academy takes a four-year course - at least for officers... we'll get to that next...

[/quote]Its not just officers, all crewmembers went to the acadamy.

I don't remember hearing that onscreen, but I wouldn't dream of contradicting Rochey. So...

That's so ignorant, I can't even find words to describe it. That's the whole point of having an armed services academy - to create OFFICERS! By the very nature of such an academy, if you graduate, you become and officer. If O'Brien completed a regular academic course at the Academy, he WOULD NOT be Chief O'Brien, he would be Ensign O'Brien!

BTW, is that why he's the only enlisted man we've EVER seen? And even he's an NCO...