www.ditl.org

Actually, it is. Primacy of purpose can easily be determined by priority. Starfleet imediately suspends a lot of scientific and exploratory missions to free up the ships they need for a war. Ergo, we can safely see that defence is at the top of Starfleet's priority.

No it isnt. The ships are on science missions the vast majority of the time. They only get sent to war when needed or military related things when needed. Science can wait battle can not thats why they interupt science for it.

Rochey, your police shoot down doesn't work.

Do they engage in warfare? Define warfare. Some of their larger actions could be considerd warfare.
Do they defend country assets? Yes.
Do they patrol boarders of hostile countries? That would depend on location, for police and armed forces alike.
Do they engage in operations of military nature? Occasionally
Do they engage the militaries of other countries? Normally, no.

That definition is on shakey ground. And all your random definitions are saying is that the military are a country's armed forces. Depending on how that's interpreted that could mean anyone with a gun is in the military.

And the reason they drop everything and fight is because their country is being invaded. If your country was being invaded wouldn't you help defend it?

Rochey wrote: Do the police engage in warfare? Nope.
Do they defend the countries assets? Yes.
Do they patrol borders with hostile countries? Not always.
Do they engage in operations of a military nature? Nope.
Do they engage the militaries of rival or hostile powers? Nope.

Not up to you to decide the definition of the word military - which you seem to be only able to define using your criteria above. Unless "Mr Inventor of the English Langauge" is still around, your definition is completely subjective.

So you only have one there, and even that is debateable.
So, no. The police is not a military force, due to the fact they do not undergo military operations.
And anyway, many countries do not have an armed police force.

I know the police aren't a military, but going by the terms "armed forces", which is what I see as the definition most often, they are.

Dictionary.com wrote:-noun
7. the military,
a. the military establishment of a nation; the armed forces.
b. military personnel, esp. commissioned officers, taken collectively: the bar, the press, and the military.

The quote above defines nothing about the military except "the armed forces" - and that's just another word, not a definition. You cannot define a word using that same word - which is exactly what that has done. You now have 4 usable definitions.

Cambridge dictionary wrote:1 relating to or belonging to the armed forces:
foreign military intervention
military targets/forces
military uniform

That is the adjective form. You now have 3 usable definitions.

Merian-Webster wrote:Main Entry: 2military
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural military also mil·i·tar·ies
Date: 1709
1: military persons; especially : army officers
2: armed forces

Armed forces - again, this could apply to a police force, and is more of another word(s) for military than the definition. You now have 2 usable definitions.

Wiktionary wrote:Noun
the military
(with the) Armed forces in general, including the Marine Corps.(US English meaning only)
It's not the job of the military to make policy.

Again, the only 'definition' that doesn't include the word military to define the word military is "armed forces", which could apply to the police and is just another word, not a definition... You now have 1 usable definition.

Encarta wrote:noun (plural mil·i·tar·y or mil·i·tar·ies)
Definition:
armed forces or its high-ranking officers: the armed forces or high-ranking members of the armed forces
attempts by the military to influence government policy

Armed forces - are we looking at a thesaurus here? None of your definitions are usable because they either a) simply refer to armed forces, which is just another word with a similar meaning. b) uses adjective form. c) it uses the word military to describe/define the word military. If you don't know what military means in the first place then that's no help.

There. Five different dictionary definitions agree with me. I'd say evidence is firmly on my side, even using the simplified definition.

None of them are valid definitions.

How odd then, that five different dicitonaries, chosen completely at random, all say the same thing. Not so subjective now, is it?

None of them are valid definitions, and it is still subjective as to what dictionary you were to use to define the noun military.

Teaos wrote:No it isnt. The ships are on science missions the vast majority of the time. They only get sent to war when needed or military related things when needed. Science can wait battle can not thats why they interupt science for it.

I'm not talking about how much time is spent doing X, I'm talking about where their priorities lie. It's quite clear that Starfleet considers defending the Federation and engageing in combat to have a higher priority than science or exploration. Find me a civilian organisation that does that.

Blackstar wrote:Do they engage in warfare? Define warfare. Some of their larger actions could be considerd warfare.

Er, no they wouldn't. At best, they would be involved in a civil war, not one with a hostile government.

Do they patrol boarders of hostile countries? That would depend on location, for police and armed forces alike.

That's what I said.

Do they engage in operations of military nature? Occasionally

Such as?

Do they engage the militaries of other countries? Normally, no.

Exactly.

And all your random definitions are saying is that the military are a country's armed forces. Depending on how that's interpreted that could mean anyone with a gun is in the military.

I know that the dictionary definitions aren't great. But the fact remains that, going by the dictionary, Starfleet is a military organisation.
That definition isn't very detailed, which is why I don't use them, instead prefering to compare Starfleet to modern military organisations.

And the reason they drop everything and fight is because their country is being invaded.

So? Find me a scientific organisation that would send personel into combat and I'll concede this point.
You just helped prove my point.

If your country was being invaded wouldn't you help defend it?

Of course. In fact, Ireland has quite a history for that sort of thing. But I wouldn't expect my civilian employers to say 'alright, today you're going to attack this place'.

Many Civil wars are fought against hostile governments. Didn't you ever pay attention in history? In fact, how could they not be fighting a hostile government? Isn't that what war is?

There are plenty of times when police engage actions that have a military nature, like when they have heavily armed criminals cornered and need to take them head on. The police do a lot of military things, but on a different scale, on a different battlefield.

And what if your employers were leading the counter attack because the Irish army got their taints handed to them?

Sorry, Thorin, I didn't see your post there.

Not up to you to decide the definition of the word military - which you seem to be only able to define using your criteria above

No, I define 'military' by looking at real militaries.
The examples above are just that, examples of the types of operations a military organisation would partake in. Starfleet also does the above, which is why I call them a military.

Unless "Mr Inventor of the English Langauge" is still around, your definition is completely subjective.

By that logic, I could say the sky is pink. After all, the person who named the colours isn't around, so definition is completely subjective.
That's why I define what something is by looking at similar organisations.

I know the police aren't a military, but going by the terms "armed forces", which is what I see as the definition most often, they are.

I know. Which is why I do not use that definition.

*snip complaints about dictionaries*

I know all that. Which is why I never attempted to use a dictionary to win a debate, until you brought the whole thing up.

None of them are valid definitions, and it is still subjective as to what dictionary you were to use to define the noun military.

I know that. I was merely pointing out how pointless it is to use a dictionary to prove such things.

Anyway, as you want the definition of 'armed forces' so badly, I went and looked that up.

Encarta dictionary wrote:armed forc·es

plural noun

Definition:

combined troops: the combined bodies of troops of a country, who fight on land, at sea, or in the air

Oxford English Dictionary wrote:armed forces

• plural noun a country's army, navy, and air force.

Merian-Webster wrote:Main Entry: armed forces
Function: noun plural
Date: 1829
: the combined military, naval, and air forces of a nation -called also armed services

Wikitionary wrote:Noun
Wikipedia has an article on:
Armed forces
armed forces

The military forces of a nation; the army, navy, airforce, marines and, sometimes, coast guard.

Wordsmyth wrote:plural noun
Pronunciation armd for sihz
Definition 1. all the military forces of a nation or group of nations.

Okay, granted none of them mentions space, but the fact remains the same.

Blackstar wrote:Many Civil wars are fought against hostile governments. Didn't you ever pay attention in history? In fact, how could they not be fighting a hostile government? Isn't that what war is?

I teach history. I know all about it. What I was refering to was hostile foreign governments. Such as the Irish war of independance.

There are plenty of times when police engage actions that have a military nature, like when they have heavily armed criminals cornered and need to take them head on.

Yeah, becuase a shoot out with criminals clearly qualifies as a military action.

The police do a lot of military things, but on a different scale, on a different battlefield.

No, they do police actions. Not military actions. They are similar in some ways, but they are different.

And what if your employers were leading the counter attack because the Irish army got their taints handed to them?

By all means, find me an instance of where a science or exploratory civilian organisation ever lead a counter attack.

So because those definitions don't mention space, you want to alter them to say that so you can win?

And you said the Irish were never in a war.

I've seen plenty of shootouts that could be on par with military actions. You clearly never visited a big city with trouble. Go visit Milwaukee, New York or Chicago and you'll see what I mean.

So because those definitions don't mention space, you want to alter them to say that so you can win?

No. The fact that they don't mention space is because we don't have any space warships now. In a future with space faring warships, its quite simple to reason that they would include space in that definition. That is hardly altering them to win, as I do not base my claims upon them.
And I like the way you try to discredit them simply becuase they don't include 'space'.

And you said the Irish were never in a war.

The Irish army was never in a war. The Irish people have been in plenty.

I've seen plenty of shootouts that could be on par with military actions. You clearly never visited a big city with trouble. Go visit Milwaukee, New York or Chicago and you'll see what I mean.

Okay, the next time I see tanks rolling down the motorway I'll let you know.

You didn't want to go into the debate about the definition of military for the exact reason you pointed out - it can't be solved. There are too many incorrect/incomplete/even contradicting definitions. Thus, as I have already said, it is subjective as to which definition is chosen, and what the word military actually means. Is a military a devoted armed force to defend and attack enemies. What are Starfleet doing most often? Military operations? Military training? Nope. What do modern day navies/armies do most often? Military operations? Military training? Yes.

Just because Starfleet defend the Federation among their science duties does not make them a military. You said you can tell what it is by its primary role, which isn't a military!

Prioritising something does not make it primary role. The primary role is what you do most often - Starfleet does science/exploration things most often [whlie militaries do military operations]. The role of highest priority is what you do that requires dropping everything else - which is military operations.

Conclusion;
Starfleet's primary role is a an exploratory and science organisation
Starfleet's highest priority is defending the Federation

If we can agree on that conclusion - then we can agree to disagree and it is subjective whether or not it is a true military - because we don't even know the "real" definition (there probably isn't one), and because it is your opinion on whether you would class an organisation as what it's primary role is, or what it's highest priority is.

I'd be satisfied with that conclusion.

You didn't want to go into the debate about the definition of military for the exact reason you pointed out - it can't be solved.

It can be solved quite easily. Simply look at modern militaries. Which is what I do, and how I reached the conclusion that Starfleet is a military organisation.

There are too many incorrect/incomplete/even contradicting definitions. Thus, as I have already said, it is subjective as to which definition is chosen, and what the word military actually means.

Odd then, how the five examples I gave, chosen completely at random, all said the same thing.

What are Starfleet doing most often? Military operations? Military training? Nope. What do modern day navies/armies do most often? Military operations? Military training? Yes.

If you classify an organisation by what it spends most time doing, then most armies would not fall under the heading of 'military', as they are not in combat.
Starfleet does train for combat, and they do undergo military operations.

Just because Starfleet defend the Federation among their science duties does not make them a military.

Just because Starfleet undergoes civilian operations does not preclude them from being a military, as I have pointed out countless times.

The primary role is what you do most often - Starfleet does science/exploration things most often [whlie militaries do military operations].

By that logic, the Irish army is not a military, as they spend little time doing military operations.

The role of highest priority is what you do that requires dropping everything else - which is military operations.

And why would a scientific and exploratory organisation concern themselves with military maters at all?

Starfleet's primary role is a an exploratory and science organisation

No, Starfleets most common use is for science and exploratory missions.
They clearly place military operations as their most important duty, and drop everything the moment conflict starts.

then we can agree to disagree and it is subjective whether or not it is a true military - because we don't even know the "real" definition (there probably isn't one)

The definition of 'military' is quite simple. It's merely the fact that you insisted on getting into semantics that mucked the whole definition thing up.

Rochey wrote: It can be solved quite easily. Simply look at modern militaries. Which is what I do, and how I reached the conclusion that Starfleet is a military organisation.

So you define something by looking a military that may be exhaustive or not all inclusive of the term military?
Do modern day militaries spend 90% of their time on exploratory or science missions? No. By your logic, then, as Starfleet does do this, it can't be a military.

Odd then, how the five examples I gave, chosen completely at random, all said the same thing.

All which were invalid. Doesn't help, does it?

If you classify an organisation by what it spends most time doing, then most armies would not fall under the heading of 'military', as they are not in combat.
Starfleet does train for combat, and they do undergo military operations.

Starfleet trains more for scientific purposes than military purposes.

Just because Starfleet undergoes civilian operations does not preclude them from being a military, as I have pointed out countless times.

Just because Starfleet undergoes military operations does not preclude them from being non-military, as has been pointed out countless times.

By that logic, the Irish army is not a military, as they spend little time doing military operations.

You're arguing with Starfleet's primary role being for scientific purposes? Primary role = what you do most often. Starfleet does scientific missions more often. Science missions = primary role. The Irish military never does military operations? If they don't, no, I don't consider the a military. But they do. They train for war. Training is a type of operation. Drills, pseudo ones... They're operations.

And why would a scientific and exploratory organisation concern themselves with military maters at all?

Because they're the best ships. The Raven isn't a part of Starfleet, and look how much that sucks in firepower. Starfleet isn't a sole scientific and exploratory organisation, but also the defence force of Starfleet. The actual classification of whether it is a military organisation or a scientific and exploratory organisation is in doubt, not whether it is completely and utterly a scientific/exploratory organisation.

No, Starfleets most common use is for science and exploratory missions.
They clearly place military operations as their most important duty, and drop everything the moment conflict starts.

Most common = primary role = what you do most. The second paragraph I agree with as I said that is their priority. But not their primary role, as they spend most of their time with nothing relating to a military role.
My primary role at college, for example, is socialising, but my highest priority is to learn. They are different.

The definition of 'military' is quite simple. It's merely the fact that you insisted on getting into semantics that mucked the whole definition thing up.

The definition of military is not quite simple. As this 30 page thread shows, and as every dictionary 'definition' that has been posted either suggests another word (armed forces), uses the word military to define the word military, or defines it as the army, navy, and air force - all of which have no real relation to space.

I say again,
Starfleet's primary role is as an exploratory and science organisation.
Starfleet's highest priority is defending the Federation.

Oh for the love of Ra. Rochey give it up. I was willing to call a stalemate but you just can't give up can you?

Everyone in the army is trained in combat, Starfleet on the other hand gives their people minimal defensive training. I wouldn't be surprised if it was optional training, at least until the war.

There are many holes in their available weapons, poorly designed 'warships', and outside the war only security, command and away teams seemed to carry weapons on a regular basis. That doesn't sound like much of a military to me.

I don't know how Ireland does it, but the militaries I'm familiar with spend most of their time training or doing specified jobs.

Here's a thought: if militaries can conduct civilian operations couldn't a civilian organization conduct military operations?

So you define something by looking a military that may be exhaustive or not all inclusive of the term military?

What? Are you suggesting that militaries are not military, simply becuase they don't follow a definition?
You do realise that definitions change with regularity?

Do modern day militaries spend 90% of their time on exploratory or science missions? No. By your logic, then, as Starfleet does do this, it can't be a military.

Do modern militaries spend 90% of their time in combat? No.
Neither does Starfleet, but this does not stop them being a military.

All which were invalid. Doesn't help, does it?

Exactly how are they invalid?

Starfleet trains more for scientific purposes than military purposes.

Irrelevant. The fact remains that they train for combat.

Just because Starfleet undergoes military operations does not preclude them from being non-military, as has been pointed out countless times.

Then why do you constantly insist that undergoing civilian operations precludes them from being a military organisation?

Primary role = what you do most often.

Sorry, but again you part ways with the English language:

Dictionary.com wrote:-adjective
1. first or highest in rank or importance; chief; principal: his primary goals in life.
2. first in order in any series, sequence, etc.
3. first in time; earliest; primitive.
4. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of primary school: the primary grades.
5. constituting or belonging to the first stage in any process.
6. of the nature of the ultimate or simpler constituents of which something complex is made up: Animals have a few primary instincts.
7. original; not derived or subordinate; fundamental; basic.
8. immediate or direct, or not involving intermediate agency: primary perceptions.
*snip irrelevant bits*

So, it seems that 'primary' is in fact what you place the most importance on, which is clearly military operations.
But of course, you're not going to accept this either, are you?

Irish military never does military operations? If they don't, no, I don't consider the a military.

I did not state that the Irish military never does military operations, I said they were rare in relativity to other operation.

They train for war. Training is a type of operation. Drills, pseudo ones... They're operations.

Yeah, and Starfleet trains too.

Because they're the best ships.

So tell me then, why would a government give its most powerful ships to a civilian organisation? Why dosen't it give them to its military, as you claim that Starfleet is not it?

The Raven isn't a part of Starfleet, and look how much that sucks in firepower.

Never heard of it. But thank you for helping to prove my point.

Most common = primary role = what you do most.

See above.

But not their primary role, as they spend most of their time with nothing relating to a military role.

So? You don't have to constantly be in combat to be a military.

The definition of military is not quite simple. As this 30 page thread shows,

We have not been debating this matter for thirty pages. We have been debating it for two. And I'll state again that the only reason it is 'not quite simple' is because you insisted on picking holes in the definition used by every dictionary I have looked at.

and as every dictionary 'definition' that has been posted either suggests another word (armed forces),

Of which I provided the definition, and which further proved my point.

or defines it as the army, navy, and air force - all of which have no real relation to space.

Again, pointless semantics. The fact the dictionary does not include 'space' under 'armed forces' is quite simple; we have no armed spaceships.
If the US was to launch a dozen or so heavily armed spaceships, would you claim the organisation that controls them is not a member of the armed forces?

Oh for the love of Ra. Rochey give it up. I was willing to call a stalemate but you just can't give up can you?

Nope. And Thorin hardly called a stalemate by posting a rebutal to my points, and then trying to get me to cease responding by trying to reach a conclusion I did not support.

Everyone in the army is trained in combat, Starfleet on the other hand gives their people minimal defensive training. I wouldn't be surprised if it was optional training, at least until the war.

It's not optional. We know for a fact that they are trained in self defence.
And the fact that they are trained in minimal self defence is understandable, if stupid, they are on a starship. How much training does a naval crewman recieve?

There are many holes in their available weapons,

So? All this points out is the incompetance of the Federation's military.
Incompetance alone does not preclude them from being a military.

poorly designed 'warships',

So? All this points out is the incompetance of the Federation's military.
Incompetance alone does not preclude them from being a military.

and outside the war only security, command and away teams seemed to carry weapons on a regular basis.

How many members of a ship's crew would cary weapons in real life?

That doesn't sound like much of a military to me.

I agree completely, its ridiculously incompetant. But it is still a military.

I don't know how Ireland does it, but the militaries I'm familiar with spend most of their time training or doing specified jobs.

How many militaries are you familiar with? Because quite a lot of them undertake non-military operations.

Here's a thought: if militaries can conduct civilian operations couldn't a civilian organization conduct military operations?

Of course. The next time you see a marine biologist's boat being sent into Iraq, let me know.