TNG - Best of Both Worlds

[Yukaphile]

I mean, one could consider what the Borg do here a border skirmish on par with the Cardassian conflicts, though obviously much larger in scope since, obviously, the Cardassians could never have taken out 39 ships. And if they had, it'd have been a call to arms for a new war which the Klingons would have eagerly joined against, given the terms of their Treaty of Alliance. I get the feeling the Dominion War was kind of the first thing of its kind. Hell, it's implied even in TOS, the Klingon war was more of a series of border skirmishes similar to the Cold War of the 20th century. Of course, that ignores the reboot movies and STD, but those are Prime and Kelvin Timelines. I'm talking Alpha Timeline.

[Jonathan101]

The Borg / Federation relationship is closer to Europe discovering the Americas. There is a huge distance between them and one party is vastly more advanced than the other, to the point where small expeditions from the former constitute existential threats of existence to the latter.

Granted, perhaps the tech gap is not quite THAT big, but it's not quite a border skirmish since they aren't bordering one another, and the Borg would consider it more a mission of exploration than a conflict, exemplifying the theme of them being a kind of dark mirror image of the Federation itself.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

The Borg / Federation relationship is closer to Europe discovering the Americas. There is a huge distance between them and one party is vastly more advanced than the other, to the point where small expeditions from the former constitute existential threats of existence to the latter.

Granted, perhaps the tech gap is not quite THAT big, but it's not quite a border skirmish since they aren't bordering one another, and the Borg would consider it more a mission of exploration than a conflict, exemplifying the theme of them being a kind of dark mirror image of the Federation itself.

You mean the South Americas? The ending of the movie Apocalypto feels like it could align with the first episode where Q introduces the Enterprise to the Borg.

[Fianna]

Although, do the Borg actually have territory? Or, once a world is assimilated, do they just load the population up into Cubes and send them off to find more worlds to assimilate?

[TrueMetis]

The Borg / Federation relationship is closer to Europe discovering the Americas. There is a huge distance between them and one party is vastly more advanced than the other, to the point where small expeditions from the former constitute existential threats of existence to the latter.

Granted, perhaps the tech gap is not quite THAT big, but it's not quite a border skirmish since they aren't bordering one another, and the Borg would consider it more a mission of exploration than a conflict, exemplifying the theme of them being a kind of dark mirror image of the Federation itself.

If funny cause that's true in one sense, give the Natives of the America's examples of European tech and they'd be lost, but in another sense, I'd much rather face off against a musket with a bow and arrow than I would than a borg cube with even the Enterprise.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Although, do the Borg actually have territory? Or, once a world is assimilated, do they just load the population up into Cubes and send them off to find more worlds to assimilate?

They have BORG SPACE.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I can't believe Chuck called Iron Fist the worst defender.

[Beastro]

How'd I miss the first page of this!?

First misconception is, that a flagship or, as it is somehow always done in Star Trek for some reason, the flagship is a dedicated ship. It is not. A flagship is the ship that the commander of a fleet (and this is not a fleet as in the fleet, but fleet as a sub-unit of a military navy) chooses as his command ship or rather, whatever ship the commander of a fleet is currently performing his duty from. This can be the biggest battleship or the crappiest torpedo boat, it does not matter. Flagship is a designation showing where the CO of a fleet is working from (indicated by the CO raising his flag, hence flagship), not a ship "type".

An issue left unmentioned is the fact that a captain of a flagship is rarely the commander of the group being commanded from the flagship. That position belongs to the person of flag rank assigned to that group that does not command the flagship.

An example is Nelson in the Trafalgar Campaign. He commanded the group tasked with chasing down the Combined Fleet, but be didn't command Victory, his flagship, Captain Thomas Hardy did.

Now, captains can command a group and have a flagship, but that operates on an ad hoc basis where a group a ships are thrown together and require leadership that is then assigned to one, typically senior, captain among them because fulfilling both functions is simply too demanding while also redundant.

The problem with someone of flag rank onboard is that they are in charge, but don't directly command. One can see that in the only real show I know that handled it right, Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, where Richard Basehart's admiral ran the show but stood off from the handling of the ship, while David Heddison was the captain who wound up enacting Basehart's plans.

The problem from a shows standpoint is, the role is effectively split leaving two halves that are characters. Better for dramatic effect and the flow of the show to just have one character be both, thus also allowing for a more heroic figure that doesn't like the flag officer planning things but being passive while the CO enacts the orders but is subordinate.

What about ST I-IV when Kirk is admiral?

That's a silly concession when the producers realizing Kirk couldn't stay a Captain forever. Fortunately they kept things sane. In the first film, he isn't supposed to directly command and takes over Enterprise from its captain. That becomes a plot point from the get go, especially when they have that problem at warp and there becomes a conflict in how to solve it that winds up with Kirk conceding he's overreaching.

After that in the second film he's overseeing training and then gets looped into the story because of Khan's mechanations effectively taking over because of them again showing that urge in him from the first while 3&4 are him going awol stealing Enterprise and then getting demoted for it in the end (which, as I said, should have been the end of his career being shoved off commanding a desk, not back to commanding another ship again).

In the case of 1&2 both as extraordinary case that are fashioned to excuse him being of flag rank, yet is in command of a ship.

It's a flagship in the sense that, as the Borg commented, it's "the strongest ship," the flag-bearer of the nation and its power structure and mission and goal and interests.

That's akin to the other definition of the term, like a certain retail company's store being the flagship that merely points to it's importance, one that doesn't have any actual role in the company beyond that (such as it being their HQ).

The issue is Star Fleet's a military organization and so one doesn't simply take the use of the term that way, even if it's actually what is implied while the use of the term for the show was a simple throwaway statement that wasn't thought through that then become a bit of dogma, as can be seen in its revival in TNG.

Well, Starfleet is treated as one big "fleet," and flagship is an easy-to-use word.

This is getting into the problem of semantics in relation to military terms that applies to Star Fleet as a whole with that silly "we're not a military" claim.

The issue is, it doesn't matter what something is called, things in a military all serve effectively the same role due to what is required of them.

One can see that in ship classification.

A destroyer of today is not the historical destroyer. The roles destroyers did in the world wars and early cold war are now served by frigates and lesser ships while today's destroyers operate more in the way historical cruisers operated in as lone patrol ships assigned to being a middling asset patrolling solo or to be the main protection and screen for major formations.

In the same way, it doesn't matter what an organization is called or how its groups are termed, they still serve the same role. In the case of the term "fleet" that can serve as both a term for a major administrative grouping of a navy as well as a term denoting the entire navy as whole.

It wouldn't matter if Star Fleet was official said to be just one big fleet, they'd still have administrative groups functioning as historical fleets within a navy as well as squadrons or task forces of those ships assigned to specific tasks operating together.

The fact that every Enterprise shown has operated in the this fashion shows that, as the entity of Star Fleet isn't operating together. In this fashion, it makes sense that the original TOS Enterprise is rated as a cruiser, as it is doing the historical role a cruiser did "cruising" around patrolling and reacting to whatever trouble it may run into.

Not being engaged in war does not mean you are not a military organisation. Switzerland hasn't been in a war for 500 years but they do in fact still have a military force and even practice conscription.

Ummmm.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonderbund_War

Even before that Switzerland participated in the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars being invaded by and made a puppet of France due to similar issues that eventually brought on the Sonderbund War.

And yet Starfleet officers learn useless stuff at the Academy, like language, history, art, creativity, etc, that's more philosophical than useful in combat. And there's the science/medical division which is like a third of the organization and serves to puzzle together the mysteries of the cosmos.

It's very clear Star Fleet has a very overt political angle to it that discourages the trappings of the military role in which it serves. It makes sense that they'd try to heavily suppress that and try to expand its other roles even if their primary one cannot be denied.

One can see that in a historical sense in the way the US Army operated up until the Korean War. The mentality that predominated was that the Army should be demobilized with only enough to keep the basic administrative and logistic side going and enough men to do whatever was required in peace time, such as to be on call for whatever Indian War might crop up. This was done from the start with a clear fear of the army producing a a would-be Napoleon type that would then use the army against the government and take over.

A part of the role beyond the simple handling of personnel was also the training of officers. Historically, the US Army favoured training their officers as engineers with the very deliberate goal of giving them something to do in peace time rather than sit around and get bored. If there was no war to fight, the major would resign their commissions and find civilian jobs until the next war, when they'd sign up again. Engineering was to provide a broad training in fields like construction so the officers could not only busy themselves as civilians, but also do so while building up the country.

The same mentality was applied to the US Navy, which is why it was chronically underfunded and neglected in peace time despite it serving the vital role of trade protection in such periods. It's also the reason why after the Civil War the Navy had to lie to fund new ship construction to replace the old hulks from that war that simply couldn't keep going. They got funding to overhaul those ships and instead used it to build entirely new ships that were given the names of the old ones to make sure no heads were raised.

The issue was the days of neglecting ones military ended in the late 19th Century as their complexity and rate of development, especially in technology, no longer allowed nations to raise a military from scratch anymore. The US gave up neglecting the USN by the 1890s (Even if it was still tried after WWII producing the revolt of the admirals) while they could afford to keep doing that to the Army until the Korean War.

I mean, one could consider what the Borg do here a border skirmish on par with the Cardassian conflicts, though obviously much larger in scope since

The Borg are more comparable to the open ended conflict many nations had with bordering hostile, often nomadic powers.

A good example of that is the trouble the Crimea Khanate caused for the Christian countries by it. They repeatedly made raids, often very deep going as far as Moscow and beyond, looting while they sought out their primary target: slaves to take back and sell to the Ottoman Empire. Same goes for the Barbary States, which raided as far as Ireland for slaves and even visited Newfoundland.

The Borg / Federation relationship is closer to Europe discovering the Americas. There is a huge distance between them and one party is vastly more advanced than the other, to the point where small expeditions from the former constitute existential threats of existence to the latter.

Granted, perhaps the tech gap is not quite THAT big, but it's not quite a border skirmish since they aren't bordering one another, and the Borg would consider it more a mission of exploration than a conflict, exemplifying the theme of them being a kind of dark mirror image of the Federation itself.

The more I think about it, the more slave raiding is the better analogy.

Your example doesn't work given the angle of colonization and the different forms it took on, from the more caste focused, yet lazy and haphazard manner of the Spain, to the exclusive one of the English that sought clear boundaries between colonists and natives that resulted in a continuous pushing of the latter back.

In the end, what the Borg do cannot be tied to colonialism given how the issues that arise from it due to human nature. I could see it being comparable to the harvesting of resources, which when it comes down to it, is what slavery raiding is all about.

[Yukaphile]

Wow, that is one doorstopper of a comment, and I love it!

[Jonathan101]

Not being engaged in war does not mean you are not a military organisation. Switzerland hasn't been in a war for 500 years but they do in fact still have a military force and even practice conscription.

Ummmm.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonderbund_War

Even before that Switzerland participated in the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars being invaded by and made a puppet of France due to similar issues that eventually brought on the Sonderbund War.

Well, that's what I get for hasty Google searches

The Borg / Federation relationship is closer to Europe discovering the Americas. There is a huge distance between them and one party is vastly more advanced than the other, to the point where small expeditions from the former constitute existential threats of existence to the latter.

Granted, perhaps the tech gap is not quite THAT big, but it's not quite a border skirmish since they aren't bordering one another, and the Borg would consider it more a mission of exploration than a conflict, exemplifying the theme of them being a kind of dark mirror image of the Federation itself.

The more I think about it, the more slave raiding is the better analogy.

Your example doesn't work given the angle of colonization and the different forms it took on, from the more caste focused, yet lazy and haphazard manner of the Spain, to the exclusive one of the English that sought clear boundaries between colonists and natives that resulted in a continuous pushing of the latter back.

In the end, what the Borg do cannot be tied to colonialism given how the issues that arise from it due to human nature. I could see it being comparable to the harvesting of resources, which when it comes down to it, is what slavery raiding is all about.

My analogy works fine, because I was painting a picture of the technological and geographical disparity between the two in comparison to Yuka's portrayal of them as having a "border skirmish". I wasn't trying to be super-exact about it.

And also, early European colonisation absolutely consisted of slave raiding- that was one of the key ventures Columbus undertook when he arrived in the Caribbean. Where slave raiding fails as an analogy itself is that the Borg don't consider those they assimilate to be slaves but as part of their Collective, so I suppose Marxist-Leninism is closer still.