TOS: A Taste of Armageddon

This forum is for discussing Chuck's videos as they are publicly released. And for bashing Neelix, but that's just repeating what I already said.
User avatar
Edvarius
Officer
Posts: 115
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 4:19 am

Re: TOS: A Taste of Armageddon

Post by Edvarius »

Formless One wrote:
Fuzzy Necromancer wrote:Okay Edvarius. I know that SR388 is somehow involved in Metroid games, but I'm unable to glean your meaning beyond that. Please elaborate.
SR388 is the home planet of the Metroids as well as one other Zerg/Tyranid level threat whose name I will omit for spoiler reasons.

Also, on a more meta level, in the games Samus Aran works for a government called... the Federation. :D
Yeah, pretty much this. It was a planet where the wildlife was too dangerous to be allowed to continue to exist. That and I've got Metroid on the brain as I just finished the remake of the second game, which happens to take place there.
User avatar
Dînadan
Officer
Posts: 435
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 9:14 pm

Re: TOS: A Taste of Armageddon

Post by Dînadan »

MadAmosMalone wrote:
I'm really enjoying the ideas and updates discussed on this thread. General Order 24 was an intriguing concept. For a super-peacenik Federation, one wonders how the total nuking of a planet became a standardized procedure on their books.
Considering all the threats Starfleet runs into, it's not surprising they'd have an Exterminatus-like procedure for dealing with them (although used less liberally than the 40k equivalent is). Although I expect there are stringent criteria that have to be met to justify invoking it and I'd think there'd probably be a review board after each time it's carried out to judge whether the captain was justified in ordering it.

Put like that, that would possibly have made for an interesting episode, with Kirk, Picard or Sisko facing a tribunal over having invoked and carried out GO24 and having to justify that action. Sort of like the DS9 episode where Worf was on trial for firing on a civilian vessel or Chuck's idea for the episode where Data thinks the robot-things are alive should have been about him on trial for attempted murder and him having to justify it by proving the robots were alive.
User avatar
Wargriffin
Captain
Posts: 579
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 9:17 pm

Re: TOS: A Taste of Armageddon

Post by Wargriffin »

Fun Fact: This episode has zero red shirt deaths, even though the away team is mostly extras
"When you rule by fear, your greatest weakness is the one who's no longer afraid."
User avatar
Dînadan
Officer
Posts: 435
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 9:14 pm

Re: TOS: A Taste of Armageddon

Post by Dînadan »

Wargriffin wrote:Fun Fact: This episode has zero red shirt deaths, even though the away team is mostly extras
Huh, the only thing that could have made that more amazing is if one of them had been played by Sean Bean (aside from the fact he's too young to have played one that is).
Archanubis
Officer
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 2:15 pm

Re: TOS: A Taste of Armageddon

Post by Archanubis »

It should probably be noted that the quote Chuck attributes to Robert E. Lee was (allegedly) said at the Battle of Fredericksburg, after the failed Union charge.
User avatar
CharlesPhipps
Captain
Posts: 4953
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2017 8:06 pm

Re: TOS: A Taste of Armageddon

Post by CharlesPhipps »

Eh, I've always felt people treated the people in this system as crazier than they were. There are countless treaties and agreements in RL that make no damn sense from the perspective of, "How best to defeat the enemy and win the war." We outlaw some WMDs, poison gas, and other "inhumane" weapons with these people taking it one step further. Given they're an interstellar pair of civilizations that have the power to eradicate one another out of hand, that's a perfectly reasonable (and YET simultaneously insane) agreement between two powers.

Kirk is an out of context problem because the Federation has every reason to blast those assholes for murdering their previous crew and assuming the Federation would roll over for it. The irony is the SMUGNESS about it is the big problem because if they blew up a starship of another power, which in their mind they did, you'd think they'd want to avoid expanding their war.

But yes, I'd use WW1 as an example of a war (or Vietnam for that matter) which the military goals of the conflict had become muddled to the point of making peace impossible. "What is the strategic goal of this conflict?" "To beat the enemy." "...how and for what?" You can't negotiate an end to the war until you have a premise. Which is why the War on Drugs and War on Terror are problems.
ChiggyvonRichthofen
Captain
Posts: 692
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 2:40 am

Re: TOS: A Taste of Armageddon

Post by ChiggyvonRichthofen »

One thing about this episode is Ambassador Fox's incredible extremism. They were specifically asked not to approach the planet, but Fox barged his way in there anyway. He forced his way onto the planet and into the situation despite protests on all sides. Apparently the Prime Directive is simply not a big deal to some of these people? The same policy is demonstrated in The Spectre of the Gun, where the Enterprise is specifically asked not to enter Melkotian space but Kirk is forced to trespass because of his "establish relations at all cost" orders.

Kirk didn't particularly want to get involved, but once he was he went all the way. Despite a few plausibility issues, that makes this episode really satisfying to watch. Kirk tries as hard as he can to avoid involvement, but the combination of inane bureaucracy and violence finally puts him over the edge and he and Scotty take things into their own hands. We don't often get the opportunity to see just how quickly the Enterprise can bring a planet to the brink of annihilation.
The owls are not what they seem.
bronnt
Officer
Posts: 362
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: TOS: A Taste of Armageddon

Post by bronnt »

CharlesPhipps wrote:Eh, I've always felt people treated the people in this system as crazier than they were.

....

But yes, I'd use WW1 as an example of a war (or Vietnam for that matter) which the military goals of the conflict had become muddled to the point of making peace impossible. "What is the strategic goal of this conflict?" "To beat the enemy." "...how and for what?" You can't negotiate an end to the war until you have a premise. Which is why the War on Drugs and War on Terror are problems.
That's why, even though there's some problems with this episode and the rather weak worldbuilding that's taking place, I think it's pretty effective. While it's almost certainly a commentary on Vietnam specifically or the Cold War in general, it feels much more applicable. I think the message really works.

Plus it feels really applicable today. I don't want to get too political, but Rand Paul a few weeks had some great comments about the emergency war powers being granted the President following 9/11 are still being used 16 years later without any Congressional vote on the topic. At some point you need to ask what the conditions for victory are, and when we can declare an end to hostilities.
User avatar
CharlesPhipps
Captain
Posts: 4953
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2017 8:06 pm

Re: TOS: A Taste of Armageddon

Post by CharlesPhipps »

Mind you, I think the message has changed a bit because we're getting much closer to the point of "forever wars" where small "acceptable" number of people are killed every day while the USA goes about its daily business as if nothing was happening. It's been sixteen years of war in Afghanistan and we now have drone strikes all over the world.

Not the similarity of Star Trek I'd want to see.
Thalolli
Redshirt
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:03 pm

Re: TOS: A Taste of Armageddon

Post by Thalolli »

Yeah, I'm pretty sure the episode left me really cold when I watched it many years ago, as a kid. But it's a lot more chilling when I watch it today as an adult.
Post Reply