Should Janeway have let Seven go back to the Borg?

[Jonathan101]

Picard was treated as wrong not because he saw the Borg as the enemy, but because he was being irrational in his hatred and wanted to HURT them, even at the point of endangering his crew. In fact everyone ELSE was advocating that they blow up the ship and kill every last one of the Borg, but Picard wanted to stay and fight and try and win a hopeless battle.

As for the "I, Borg" thing, well one it would be silly if the Borg could have been defeated by something so trivial as impossible math, and besides that the fact that they are indeed brainwashed enemy soldiers means that it would be more humane to at least try and find ways to rescue and de-programme as many Borg as they could before they resort to genocide. I'll also add that if the Borg thought for a second that the Federation were capable of destroying them that would do nothing but provoke them into ramping up their efforts to conquer /destroy the Federation, which is what ends up happening in the novels if I'm correct.

I wonder what people think of Section 31 trying to wipe out the Founders. Is genocide acceptable in that case as well?

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I don't see wiping out the Founders as as bad as wiping out the Borg. Still kinda antithetical to the Federation or Starfleet as a whole, but I feel like it's more of a monolith than the Borg for all the potential victimized inhabitants of the borg. The fact that it wasn't really state sanctioned so to speak is a problem too. (of course it very well might have been sanctioned considering how much trouble Bashir had getting through the chain of command to get answers).

And with Picard, yeah it was just a matter of how much it got to his head with the Moby Dick parallel. I don't get why it isn't wrong that he gunned down the ensign on the premise that he was unsavable, just knowing that at least himself was reverted.

[ChiggyvonRichthofen]

Picard was treated as wrong not because he saw the Borg as the enemy, but because he was being irrational in his hatred and wanted to HURT them, even at the point of endangering his crew. In fact everyone ELSE was advocating that they blow up the ship and kill every last one of the Borg, but Picard wanted to stay and fight and try and win a hopeless battle.

As for the "I, Borg" thing, well one it would be silly if the Borg could have been defeated by something so trivial as impossible math, and besides that the fact that they are indeed brainwashed enemy soldiers means that it would be more humane to at least try and find ways to rescue and de-programme as many Borg as they could before they resort to genocide. I'll also add that if the Borg thought for a second that the Federation were capable of destroying them that would do nothing but provoke them into ramping up their efforts to conquer /destroy the Federation, which is what ends up happening in the novels if I'm correct.

I wonder what people think of Section 31 trying to wipe out the Founders. Is genocide acceptable in that case as well?

Fair enough on First Contact.

I would be against the genocide of the Borg (except possibly as a last resort) for the reasons you mention- we've already seen that restoration is possible. It's not even shown to be particularly difficult provided that you can capture a Borg. But in "I, Borg" Crusher argues that it would be destroying an entire species, which is the argument I don't put any stock in.

The Founders are much trickier since you're not actually dealing with a singular entity and not an existential threat like the Borg.

[LavarosVA]

Picard was treated as wrong not because he saw the Borg as the enemy, but because he was being irrational in his hatred and wanted to HURT them, even at the point of endangering his crew. In fact everyone ELSE was advocating that they blow up the ship and kill every last one of the Borg, but Picard wanted to stay and fight and try and win a hopeless battle.

As for the "I, Borg" thing, well one it would be silly if the Borg could have been defeated by something so trivial as impossible math, and besides that the fact that they are indeed brainwashed enemy soldiers means that it would be more humane to at least try and find ways to rescue and de-programme as many Borg as they could before they resort to genocide. I'll also add that if the Borg thought for a second that the Federation were capable of destroying them that would do nothing but provoke them into ramping up their efforts to conquer /destroy the Federation, which is what ends up happening in the novels if I'm correct.

I wonder what people think of Section 31 trying to wipe out the Founders. Is genocide acceptable in that case as well?

Fair enough on First Contact.

I would be against the genocide of the Borg (except possibly as a last resort) for the reasons you mention- we've already seen that restoration is possible. It's not even shown to be particularly difficult provided that you can capture a Borg. But in "I, Borg" Crusher argues that it would be destroying an entire species, which is the argument I don't put any stock in.

The Founders are much trickier since you're not actually dealing with a singular entity and not an existential threat like the Borg.

Restoration is possible, sure. But it's like trying to empty the ocean with a bucket. We've seen at most, what, 100-200 drones freed from the ever expanding collections of trillions. If some borg can be saved and returned to a state of individuality, certainly help them do so, but if I had the opportunity to kill every single borg I would leap at the chance.

[ChiggyvonRichthofen]

Picard was treated as wrong not because he saw the Borg as the enemy, but because he was being irrational in his hatred and wanted to HURT them, even at the point of endangering his crew. In fact everyone ELSE was advocating that they blow up the ship and kill every last one of the Borg, but Picard wanted to stay and fight and try and win a hopeless battle.

As for the "I, Borg" thing, well one it would be silly if the Borg could have been defeated by something so trivial as impossible math, and besides that the fact that they are indeed brainwashed enemy soldiers means that it would be more humane to at least try and find ways to rescue and de-programme as many Borg as they could before they resort to genocide. I'll also add that if the Borg thought for a second that the Federation were capable of destroying them that would do nothing but provoke them into ramping up their efforts to conquer /destroy the Federation, which is what ends up happening in the novels if I'm correct.

I wonder what people think of Section 31 trying to wipe out the Founders. Is genocide acceptable in that case as well?

Fair enough on First Contact.

I would be against the genocide of the Borg (except possibly as a last resort) for the reasons you mention- we've already seen that restoration is possible. It's not even shown to be particularly difficult provided that you can capture a Borg. But in "I, Borg" Crusher argues that it would be destroying an entire species, which is the argument I don't put any stock in.

The Founders are much trickier since you're not actually dealing with a singular entity and not an existential threat like the Borg.

Restoration is possible, sure. But it's like trying to empty the ocean with a bucket. We've seen at most, what, 100-200 drones freed from the ever expanding collections of trillions. If some borg can be saved and returned to a state of individuality, certainly help them do so, but if I had the opportunity to kill every single borg I would leap at the chance.

If you kill them all, then there you will never have another chance to save anyone. I could see the argument on both sides there, but what I consider really absurd is a) deciding that Hugh must be returned immediately, and b) that this is somehow Picard's decision to make.

In the TOS era where communication and travel could take days and they were on the fringes of known space, Kirk was sometimes forced to essentially "be" Starfleet. In the TNG era, there's really no excuse for Picard instantly making those decisions. Hugh should have been kept and studied, with their plan to shut down all the Borg being their last resort. I guess he might have been lonely and upset; tough luck there. Who knows? Maybe their original plan could have been modified to free the Borg, but they didn't keep him nearly long enough to examine all the options.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

That's a strong point for consideration bringing into question Picard's directive on such a matter.

[LavarosVA]

Picard was treated as wrong not because he saw the Borg as the enemy, but because he was being irrational in his hatred and wanted to HURT them, even at the point of endangering his crew. In fact everyone ELSE was advocating that they blow up the ship and kill every last one of the Borg, but Picard wanted to stay and fight and try and win a hopeless battle.

As for the "I, Borg" thing, well one it would be silly if the Borg could have been defeated by something so trivial as impossible math, and besides that the fact that they are indeed brainwashed enemy soldiers means that it would be more humane to at least try and find ways to rescue and de-programme as many Borg as they could before they resort to genocide. I'll also add that if the Borg thought for a second that the Federation were capable of destroying them that would do nothing but provoke them into ramping up their efforts to conquer /destroy the Federation, which is what ends up happening in the novels if I'm correct.

I wonder what people think of Section 31 trying to wipe out the Founders. Is genocide acceptable in that case as well?

Fair enough on First Contact.

I would be against the genocide of the Borg (except possibly as a last resort) for the reasons you mention- we've already seen that restoration is possible. It's not even shown to be particularly difficult provided that you can capture a Borg. But in "I, Borg" Crusher argues that it would be destroying an entire species, which is the argument I don't put any stock in.

The Founders are much trickier since you're not actually dealing with a singular entity and not an existential threat like the Borg.

Restoration is possible, sure. But it's like trying to empty the ocean with a bucket. We've seen at most, what, 100-200 drones freed from the ever expanding collections of trillions. If some borg can be saved and returned to a state of individuality, certainly help them do so, but if I had the opportunity to kill every single borg I would leap at the chance.

If you kill them all, then there you will never have another chance to save anyone. I could see the argument on both sides there, but what I consider really absurd is a) deciding that Hugh must be returned immediately, and b) that this is somehow Picard's decision to make.

In the TOS era where communication and travel could take days and they were on the fringes of known space, Kirk was sometimes forced to essentially "be" Starfleet. In the TNG era, there's really no excuse for Picard instantly making those decisions. Hugh should have been kept and studied, with their plan to shut down all the Borg being their last resort. I guess he might have been lonely and upset; tough luck there. Who knows? Maybe their original plan could have been modified to free the Borg, but they didn't keep him nearly long enough to examine all the options.

What I mean is, if I had the option of leaving the borg alone so maybe some more individuals could be freed, vs stopping them forever. I'd do the later.