www.ditl.org

Pfft, I reserve the right to hammer home logic long after it's already been delivered!

The Web didn't damage the NX-01 in an offensive matter. It was when it slammed itself against the web that it was damaged and it was finished by the tholian's offensive weapons. If you trap an animal in a cage, and then it rams the sides of the cage, does that mean you're using the cage as a weapon?

What part of 'give examples' do you have trouble understanding. Making vague references is not giving an example; it's being evasive. Then again, I don't think anyone's surprised at that

Sorry, I usually don't catch the name of the TNG episodes. I tend to fall asleep during the theme song.

that is not the purpose of combat or war,

The idea is to avoid a war by not blowing up enemy ships over every single incident. And what good has combat and war ever done? Only produce more deadly weapons.

You wouldn't happen to be related to a guy called Chamberlain, would you?

No, I don't think so. Why?

ChakatBlackstar wrote:The Web didn't damage the NX-01 in an offensive matter. It was when it slammed itself against the web that it was damaged and it was finished by the tholian's offensive weapons. If you trap an animal in a cage, and then it rams the sides of the cage, does that mean you're using the cage as a weapon?

You refered to disabling a ship. The net does nothing of the sort - it merely contains it. Its weapons and shields are not affected.

Sorry, I usually don't catch the name of the TNG episodes. I tend to fall asleep during the theme song.

If you can't provide specific examples don't use the series to support your claims.

The idea is to avoid a war by not blowing up enemy ships over every single incident.

Very nice of you. What happens when you end up in war without any weapons, hmm? Avoiding war is preferable to having to fight one, but having the means to fight the wars that do happen is essential. Starfleet, idiotic as they may be, understand this simple fact. A pity you apparently do not.

And what good has combat and war ever done? Only produce more deadly weapons.

Louis XIV. Napoleon. Kaiser Bill. Hitler. All extremely unpleasent characters who were stopped not by people being nice, but by force of arms.

I'm fairly certain that Hitler couldn't have been reasoned with, or coerced into abandoning world-domination through use of diplomacy. Force was the only option, as in numerous other situations.

And, war has produced other advances besides weapons; aircraft technology advanced significantly thanks to WW1 & II. Helicopters in particular weren't more than puny novelty aircraft before that; now they're used to fight fires, chase escaping criminals, and save lives as air ambulances.

There are other examples of beneficial technology produced because of warfare, but I'm too lazy to list all of it.

Seafort - beat me to the post on Hitler.

Captain Seafort wrote:

ChakatBlackstar wrote:The idea is to avoid a war by not blowing up enemy ships over every single incident.

Very nice of you. What happens when you end up in war without any weapons, hmm? Avoiding war is preferable to having to fight one, but having the means to fight the wars that do happen is essential. Starfleet, idiotic as they may be, understand this simple fact. A pity you apparently do not.

You don't need weapons if you don't go to war. There are always alternatives to fighting.

ChakatBlackstar wrote:You don't need weapons if you don't go to war. There are always alternatives to fighting.

There are - death and slavery. Unless you find either of them an attractive option, the ability to wage war is a necessity.

Captain Seafort wrote:

ChakatBlackstar wrote:You don't need weapons if you don't go to war. There are always alternatives to fighting.

There are - death and slavery. Unless you find either of them an attractive option, the ability to wage war is a necessity.

I suppose you also believe that nuclear weapons are necessary to detur World War III

I suppose the whole of Europe could've just run away to America or Canada, right?

Unless Superman disarms the entire world at once, disarming ourselves would be like turning your back during a knife fight.

ChakatBlackstar wrote:
The idea is to avoid a war by not blowing up enemy ships over every single incident. And what good has combat and war ever done? Only produce more deadly weapons.

You sir, are a fool. No one wants war but to refuse to prepare for it is the height of folly and would be negligance on the part of the government. No matter how ridiculous some of us think that Starfleet is, without them the Federation would have been steamrolled by the Klingons, Romulans, Cardies, Tholians and any other third rate power you care to name.

Now can we dispense with this holier than thou crusade and go back to designing the ship?

Cpl Kendall wrote:

ChakatBlackstar wrote:
The idea is to avoid a war by not blowing up enemy ships over every single incident. And what good has combat and war ever done? Only produce more deadly weapons.

You sir, are a fool. No one wants war but to refuse to prepare for it is the height of folly and would be negligance on the part of the government.

If no one wants war then why does it happen? In fact why would anyone even join the military if they don't like war?

ChakatBlackstar wrote:
If no one wants war then why does it happen? In fact why would anyone even join the military if they don't like war?

What does this have to do with the fact that the Federation requires a military? Oh that's right...bugger all, like a good 2/3rds of your arguments.

But for poops and giggles I will clue you in:

People join the military for any number of reasons, from old fashioned patriotism, a desire to help people in far-away lands, escape a shiity home or for free education. And everywhere in between.

Now war, is not desirable by the majority of the military or even the population but there's always some chucklehead somewhere that wants what you have. For the Federation, that's everyone around them. Even their Klingon "allies" occasionally turn on them.

Cpl Kendall wrote:Now war, is not desirable by the majority of the military.

I will be laughing for the next hour or so thanks to this.

You don't need weapons if you don't go to war. There are always alternatives to fighting.

I will be laughing for the next hour or so thanks to this.

Hmm, long serving member of the armed forces says one thing about the mentality of members of the armed forces.
19 year old who has been shown on numerous occasions to know damn all on numerous subjects says another.

Take a wild guess as to whose word has more credibility here.

ChakatBlackstar wrote:
I will be laughing for the next hour or so thanks to this.

Listen to me you ignorant little man, war means our friends die. Not even you can fail to see that.

At any rate, seeing as you lack an actual point I assume this means that we can go back to discussing the ship rather than your damn fool idealistic crusade.

Rochey wrote:

I will be laughing for the next hour or so thanks to this.

Hmm, long serving member of the armed forces says one thing about the mentality of members of the armed forces.
19 year old who has been shown on numerous occasions to know damn all on numerous subjects says another.

Take a wild guess as to whose word has more credibility here.

I'd guess you'll take the brainwashed military fanatic.

Listen to me you ignorant little man, war means our friends die. Not even you can fail to see that

And peace means your friends don't die.

At any rate, seeing as you lack an actual point

My point was that weapons are only good for one thing, killing, which sends the wrong message when you're making first contact.

I assume this means that we can go back to discussing the ship .

So are we actually going to vote on the ship's purpose then?

rather than your damn fool idealistic crusade

I remember watching a movie about a kid who went on a damn fool idealistic crusade. The kid overthrew an empire.