"Soverign states act in their own self interest"

[PJO3434]

While in the real world the statement made by Woolsey is correct, I have an ethical problem with it, and I think Earth has two very important interests in protecting Langara against the Lucian Alliance.

First, my ethical problem stems from the fact that Earth would likely have been destroyed without the help of the Asgard, who had no particular interest in saving it. Sure, the alliance with the Asgard greatly benefited them, but when they started protecting Earth, the myriad benefits could not have been known. Additionally, by giving Earth all their technology and knowledge, the Asgard, I believe, were also giving Earth the responsibility to protect helpless people against aggressors. (I just wish they left us with some of their ships because I would love to see Asgard ships in our fleet.)

Second, I believe Earth has at least two important interests in protecting Langara. The first interest is, of course, preventing the Lucian Alliance from getting access to Langara's stargate. Even if they were unable to reach Destiny because they did not have Dr. McCay's solution, they would destroy our best opportunity to reach Destiny by trying to reach Destiny and exploding Langara. The second interest is reducing the amount of ships the Lucian Alliance has. If the Lucian Alliance tries to invade Langara to secure its stargate, we would have the opportunity to destroy (or disable and secure) some of their motherships (which would weaken them as a threat to Langara, Earth, and all other planets).

[Mister Oragahn]

The biggest problem is that it sounds like something bad.
"Sovereign states act in their own self interest"
Yet there's no proof it would be detrimental to other countries much. It would be particularly hypocritical to say it would largely produce negative effects when it would come from someone who knows that Earth could have access to technologies that would solve a great many problems and literally stop the power mongering of some people in trying to hold more of the same.

[morbosfist]

The Asgard long since moved beyond political divisions. They don't count as far as Woolsey's declaration goes.

As for the rest, Woolsey was bargaining. He was hoping to get them to make a concession, but Ovirda, just as savvy in these matters, knew full well he did not have to.

[D Toccs]

As for the rest, Woolsey was bargaining. He was hoping to get them to make a concession, but Ovirda, just as savvy in these matters, knew full well he did not have to.

Exactly, it was all just political posturing. Woolsey put it on the table as a sort of veiled threat and Ovirda called him on it straight away, which is why Woolsey didn't press the issue.

[Ben 'Teal'c would WIN!!' Noble]

Sometimes it is important for states to work in their own intrest as when in negotiations you to find the soloution that works for you. Like it or not in the Middle East to have our fancy lifestyles and fast cars we have to do deals with unsavory people to get oil supplies. So if we want to get to destiny we might have use force, I don't like that idea but I doubt the people on Destiny care if we have use some force to get a supply line.

[thekillman]

what if helping others IS your self interest. the Asgard were dying and needed a successor. thus helping earth was in their self-interest, especially since we had a knack for beating impossible odds and killing replicators.

[D Toccs]

Sometimes it is important for states to work in their own intrest as when in negotiations you to find the soloution that works for you. Like it or not in the Middle East to have our fancy lifestyles and fast cars we have to do deals with unsavory people to get oil supplies. So if we want to get to destiny we might have use force, I don't like that idea but I doubt the people on Destiny care if we have use some force to get a supply line.

The point is though . . . is an ancient rust bucket and the 60 plus people onboard worth committing acts of aggression on a friendly world?

There was a time when the IOA were going to put the SGC on skeleton crew because they thought that Atlantis and the Pegasus Galaxy presented more opportunities for technological gains.
Now with the databases of both the Asgard and the Ancients within easy reach of the top scientists, Earth is for some reason willing to put their inter-planetary reputation on the line to try and reach a millions of years old ship on a mission that even the Ancients didn't follow up on.
I don't buy it.

[jelgate]

The point is though . . . is an ancient rust bucket and the 60 plus people onboard worth committing acts of aggression on a friendly world?

There was a time when the IOA were going to put the SGC on skeleton crew because they thought that Atlantis and the Pegasus Galaxy presented more opportunities for technological gains.
Now with the databases of both the Asgard and the Ancients within easy reach of the top scientists, Earth is for some reason willing to put their inter-planetary reputation on the line to try and reach a millions of years old ship on a mission that even the Ancients didn't follow up on.
I don't buy it.
Humanity time and time again has shown our hunger to explore what is unknown. In that vein more than anything I can see the prospect of going to Destiny. Yes its risky but to gauge what its seen would water many people's appetite. As for acts of aggression it would hardly be the first time we have done such an act for exploration

[D Toccs]

Humanity time and time again has shown our hunger to explore what is unknown. In that vein more than anything I can see the prospect of going to Destiny. Yes its risky but to gauge what its seen would water many people's appetite. As for acts of aggression it would hardly be the first time we have done such an act for exploration

Don't get me wrong. I can fully see the benefits of reaching Destiny, just the database of the galaxies it's passed through is invaluable.
But alienating a technologically advanced and friendly world to MAYBE get there? I just don't think that Destiny is worth that.

[Flyboy]

Don't get me wrong. I can fully see the benefits of reaching Destiny, just the database of the galaxies it's passed through is invaluable.
But alienating a technologically advanced and friendly world to MAYBE get there? I just don't think that Destiny is worth that.

I would very much agree with that.

[morbosfist]

Don't get me wrong. I can fully see the benefits of reaching Destiny, just the database of the galaxies it's passed through is invaluable.
But alienating a technologically advanced and friendly world to MAYBE get there? I just don't think that Destiny is worth that.Langara is only in the 1940s as far as tech goes. Their only real resource is naquadria, and Earth has long since moved beyond that as anything but an explosive. And they thought Langara was dealing with their enemies, which is more than enough reason even in the real world.

[Ben 'Teal'c would WIN!!' Noble]

Yon know we already have 3 threads on this topic.

What happened to 'never leave anybody behind', what is the logic here 80 people don't matter and wasn't the whole point of Alliances that Destiny's mission is important and worthwile.

[D Toccs]

Langara is only in the 1940s as far as tech goes. Their only real resource is naquadria, and Earth has long since moved beyond that as anything but an explosive. And they thought Langara was dealing with their enemies, which is more than enough reason even in the real world.

Don't be foolish, Earth might have incorporated a few alien technologies into it's ships, but overall Earth is still at the exact same technology level it was at in 1996 when it started the Stargate Program.

For example : the engineers who designed and installed the ring transporters on all of Earth's moterships, had to ride a clunky old elevator down to the basement where they built those ring transporters.

[Flyboy]

Don't be foolish, Earth might have incorporated a few alien technologies into it's ships, but overall Earth is still at the exact same technology level it was at in 1996 when it started the Stargate Program.

For example : the engineers who designed and installed the ring transporters on all of Earth's moterships, had to ride a clunky old elevator down to the basement where they built those ring transporters.

Hey... hey... we have broadband and touch screen phones. Check your facts. ;)

[Yipikyyaysupremecommanderthor]

Langara didnt want to risk their world to them earth is alien even though they're people originally came from there. The asgard do have divisions there are the evil asgard in pegasus or Loki who is presumed dead along with the good ones. Earth has done things that appeared arrogant and in many ways its american manifest destiny to the stars... the sg team is notorious for americanizing different cultures hence forth they put there needs in front of the more poorer and needier civilizations in the galaxy.



Its clear though that the race who best represents the greed and best interests is the goauld.

[morbosfist]

Don't be foolish, Earth might have incorporated a few alien technologies into it's ships, but overall Earth is still at the exact same technology level it was at in 1996 when it started the Stargate Program.

For example : the engineers who designed and installed the ring transporters on all of Earth's moterships, had to ride a clunky old elevator down to the basement where they built those ring transporters.1996 is still half a century better than Langara, and have you missed all the times SG1 has had their spiffy spaceships just beam them cross-country?

It's foolish to think that Earth, even discounting alien technology, is not technologically superior The scientists in the episode itself marvel at McKay's entirely human made handheld computer. That right there is how advanced we are compared to them.

[knowles2]

Langara is only in the 1940s as far as tech goes. Their only real resource is naquadria, and Earth has long since moved beyond that as anything but an explosive. And they thought Langara was dealing with their enemies, which is more than enough reason even in the real world.

They are obviously more advance than that, the drilling rig for example had shields.

That was Rodney just show boating and being a arrogant ass as usual.
In someways the Langarans are more advance than Earth, they seem to have mastered Naquadria power which is equal to Earths, and the drill they built was more advance than anything we have on Earth in the area of drilling technology.

They also equip the craft with Gould technology which they no doubt applied to other areas of there society and technology.

[jelgate]

They are obviously more advance than that, the drilling rig for example had shields.
That was Rodney just show boating and being a arrogant ass as usual.
In someways the Langarans are more advance than Earth, they seem to have mastered Naquadria power which is equal to Earths, and the drill they built was more advance than anything we have on Earth in the area of drilling technology.

They also equip the craft with Gould technology which they no doubt applied to other areas of there society and technology.
Goa'uld technology developed by a Goa'uld

[morrismike]

I would very much agree with that.
me too

[morrismike]

It was absolutely outrageous for us to even ask the Langoreans for permission to dial Destiny.

[knowles2]

Goa'uld technology developed by a Goa'uld

Built by Langaran hands and engineers. She was even teaching Jonas stuff.
They would have gained a lot of advance knowledge from her to enable them to build that drilling rig. Which would make them more advance than 1940s technology.

Again it just Rodney show boating .

[jelgate]

Built by Langaran hands and engineers. She was even teaching Jonas stuff.
They would have gained a lot of advance knowledge from her to enable them to build that drilling rig. Which would make them more advance than 1940s technology.

Again it just Rodney show boating .

Its one thing to build something. Its another to understand how it works.

[mjwalshe]

Hey... hey... we have broadband and touch screen phones. Check your facts. ;)

and given the tiny size of Naquadah generators this would have a step change in how Tanks and Ships (wet navy would be built) a MBT powered by a Naquadah generator would be as far beyond a M1 Abraham's as the Abraham's is beyond a Mark I. An that's amusing you stay with track layers and don't gotto a Panzer (grav tank)

You could probably easily replace a traditional reactor in a Sub or CAV.

[morbosfist]

Again it just Rodney show boating .If it were showboating the lady would not have been so surprised. Rodney may be arrogant, but he's right. The Langarans are in the 1940s as far as tech goes.

[Kaiphantom]

Sometimes it is important for states to work in their own intrest as when in negotiations you to find the soloution that works for you. Like it or not in the Middle East to have our fancy lifestyles and fast cars we have to do deals with unsavory people to get oil supplies. So if we want to get to destiny we might have use force, I don't like that idea but I doubt the people on Destiny care if we have use some force to get a supply line.

Yup. To get what we want, we'll just have to act like the Goa'uld. Or the Ori. Or the Wraith. Or the...

Just so we're clear... who am I supposed to root for in this show again? It gets confusing...

[Flyboy]

Yup. To get what we want, we'll just have to act like the Goa'uld. Or the Ori. Or the Wraith. Or the...

Just so we're clear... who am I supposed to root for in this show again? It gets confusing...

Who says you're supposed to root for anyone?

[Kaiphantom]

Who says you're supposed to root for anyone?

Ah, so the writers want us to think of O'Neill as just another political scumbag? :o

Go LA! Blow up the Earth and show those rat *******s what for! I think I may enjoy watching this again, hoping and praying someone kills the stupid Destiny crew members off, and that the LA rightly takes their place on it. =) Hmm, the only question is... do we let the smurfs Deep-fry Chloe? Or have the LA spare her so they can use her as a comfort girl?

[Flyboy]

Ah, so the writers want us to think of O'Neill as just another political scumbag? :o

Go LA! Blow up the Earth and show those rat *******s what for! I think I may enjoy watching this again, hoping and praying someone kills the stupid Destiny crew members off, and that the LA rightly takes their place on it. =) Hmm, the only question is... do we let the smurfs Deep-fry Chloe? Or have the LA spare her so they can use her as a comfort girl?

Always with the absolutes...

Why can't O'Neill be grey. Like most real people in such positions. Trust me. Compared to Bomber Harris, he's a saint.

[Kaiphantom]

Always with the absolutes...

Why can't O'Neill be grey. Like most real people in such positions. Trust me. Compared to Bomber Harris, he's a saint.

Why can't you accept that O'Neill wasn't grey? Or answer this other question: Do you think someone who abuses your trust and goes through your things, is "grey"? That if you catch them doing bad things to you, they can just chuckle and say "Oops! I was just being gray" and you'll go "oh, that's alright!"?

I know grey. SG-1 already gave us that; it was called "Shades of Grey." What you're proposing is the Mayborne strategy, and we arrested him and threw him in jail for that. He was an "Earth first" kind of guy, and we're no different. O'Neill has turned into the kind of person he once denounced, so even if you call him grey, we can also call him a hypocrite. Mayborne was right after all, eh?

And this means that the heroes Stargate has shown us, have been deconstructed and destroyed. The ones today, aren't the ones we knew back then.

Anyway, you keep harping on this "grey" subject, as if it somehow magically renders everyone innocent. "He's not bad! He's... he''s just... he's just... grey! Yeah, that's it!" It's a neat way of trying to tiptoe around the moral ramifications here. Can't you just call it wrong? Something wrong, is not grey; it's wrong. It's intellectually disingenuous to try and pretend otherwise. You're smart enough to know that.

[morrismike]

and given the tiny size of Naquadah generators this would have a step change in how Tanks and Ships (wet navy would be built) a MBT powered by a Naquadah generator would be as far beyond a M1 Abraham's as the Abraham's is beyond a Mark I. An that's amusing you stay with track layers and don't gotto a Panzer (grav tank)

You could probably easily replace a traditional reactor in a Sub or CAV.
no no no no
Those reactors in subs are pushing 100 MWT. Mk I is around 2 MWe and a MKII may peak out slightly higher than that. You cannot that kind of power in something like that. Look at the copper cables they make the hook up with for a clue.

[morrismike]

Ah, so the writers want us to think of O'Neill as just another political scumbag? :o

Go LA! Blow up the Earth and show those rat *******s what for! I think I may enjoy watching this again, hoping and praying someone kills the stupid Destiny crew members off, and that the LA rightly takes their place on it. =) Hmm, the only question is... do we let the smurfs Deep-fry Chloe? Or have the LA spare her so they can use her as a comfort girl?
The writers have been ruining Jack for some time now.

[D Toccs]

It's not like this was the first time that Earth has been in the wrong.

They were prepared to slaughter hundreds of Unas so we could dig a mine on their holy site.
They were going to give heavy water to the Eurodans to make WMDs, with no questions asked.
They used Wraith PoWs for scientific experimentation multiple times.
They made a deal with Niam to turn off the Asuran aggression, instead they programed them to go to war with the Wraith, and then committed genocide on them when the war got out of hand.

At least this time, the show actually treated what the "heroes" were doing as morally wrong.
SG1 and SGA tended to be more black and white, so even when what the heroes did was morally reprehensible, they were the good guys so they were just and right to do it. SGU has made everything into shades of grey, which is much more realistic and I think a good thing for the franchise.

[Flyboy]

Why can't you accept that O'Neill wasn't grey? Or answer this other question: Do you think someone who abuses your trust and goes through your things, is "grey"? That if you catch them doing bad things to you, they can just chuckle and say "Oops! I was just being gray" and you'll go "oh, that's alright!"?

Because O'Neill was often only reigned in by Daniel. There were a lot of times O'Neill wanted to do something morally questionable. Don't be over simplistic, the actions themselves are never grey - it is the situation that led to said action. The Area Bombing of German and Japanese cities in World War 2 was not grey, it was pure and simply immoral. The situation that led to it, regardless of what argument you follow is the grey area. Arguments to justify the actions of the Royal Air Force and the United States Army Air Force in WW2 continue, because it is not a clear cut situation, despite the mass DELIBERATE killing of civilians being clearly wrong. Because like it or not, in times of war, when your job is to visit violence upon your enemy, situations are rarely black and white. But even if the wrong thing is done for the right reason, even if we were to decide, for example, that the area bombing in WW2 was the right course of action, it does NOT under ANY circumstances make the action of bombing itself RIGHT, or even GREY. It is an immoral action against the backdrop of a grey situation.



I know grey. SG-1 already gave us that; it was called "Shades of Grey." What you're proposing is the Mayborne strategy, and we arrested him and threw him in jail for that. He was an "Earth first" kind of guy, and we're no different. O'Neill has turned into the kind of person he once denounced, so even if you call him grey, we can also call him a hypocrite. Mayborne was right after all, eh?

And this means that the heroes Stargate has shown us, have been deconstructed and destroyed. The ones today, aren't the ones we knew back then.

Pretty much. O'Neill has found himself in a position of incredibly high power, in the wake of a DISASTER (once again, remember the damage to the Pentagon caused by ONE conventional aircraft on 9/11 and tell me that the bomb on the LA ship NEEDED to go off to cause any kind of destruction). O'Neill is NOT the same man, he's had half a decade of senior command responsibility and is now trying to fight an enemy different to that he's used to. It's like a General who's used to fighting the Nazi army suddenly fighting the Taliban. It makes things harder, and commands make difficult decision. Except for rare circumstances, those that make the tough calls never used to have to make such decisions, or even support such decisions.

What needs to be remembered is that the overriding factor in the Langaran operation was the 'fact' that they had turned to the Lucian Alliance. This wasn't an issue of stealing from helpless cultures. This was the belief that an ally had betrayed Earth and that action had to be taken. This was ESPIONAGE, and in the world of espionage EVERYTHING is grey, unlike in warfare. We are only now developing concepts of a 'Just Intelligence' principle, and even that is rudamentry.





Anyway, you keep harping on this "grey" subject, as if it somehow magically renders everyone innocent. "He's not bad! He's... he''s just... he's just... grey! Yeah, that's it!" It's a neat way of trying to tiptoe around the moral ramifications here. Can't you just call it wrong? Something wrong, is not grey; it's wrong. It's intellectually disingenuous to try and pretend otherwise. You're smart enough to know that.

Again with the absolutes. O'Neill is in a position of supreme responsibility. He is NOT in the same position he once was. And thus, quite catagorically, not capable of being the same man. Did I ONCE say that being grey renders people innocent? No, I did not. An immoral act is an immoral act. But that does not strictly render the person responsible for it a bad person. Not automatically anyway... like it or not, most people are grey - they make the best decisions they can for the time. People in O'Neill's position don't always manage to think about what's right - unfortunatly - they often only are able to think about what's necessary. The old saying of 'doing the wrong thing for the right reason'. The 'thing' is black. The 'reason' is white. It's a grey area. It pops up quite often in regards to discussions on torture. Torture is inherently wrong. But many good
men, men who are concerned about the lvies of millions, have argued for its use to save lives. The IDEA of using torture then becomes a grey one, because though it is inherently wrong in itself, the context its placed into is nowhere so simple. But no such man would delude himself into thinking that the ACT of torture was not immoral. If someone did, they certainly would be 'black' (on a shade of grey scale, not ethnicity before anyone jumps me).

I don't want to tiptoe around moral ramifications at all - what happened on Langara was wrong. Plain and simple - but that does not make O'Neill and those that authorised it bad people, or out of character, it means that the character made a call that was immoral, but (apparetly) necessary - thus - grey!

Furthermore, for the most part - we have ALWAYS been shown heroics at the tactical level, occasionally the operational level and VERY RARELY at the strategic level. As D Toccs has already highlighted (and he is quoted below for good measure) - Earth's strategic decisions have very often been grey, morally questionable but for good reasons. Our 'heroes' had the benefit of not needing to make such calls, at the tactical level, not only are situations clearer, but its easier to stand up and object, not least because the laws of war demand such actions, but because they're not the ones who had to come to the hard decisions in the first place. Anyone who's had any kind of command, and BEEN under command prior to that understands that until you sit in 'the chair' it's all too easy to challenge the voices from above and object, because you never truly understand the big picture.



It's not like this was the first time that Earth has been in the wrong.

They were prepared to slaughter hundreds of Unas so we could dig a mine on their holy site.
They were going to give heavy water to the Eurodans to make WMDs, with no questions asked.
They used Wraith PoWs for scientific experimentation multiple times.
They made a deal with Niam to turn off the Asuran aggression, instead they programed them to go to war with the Wraith, and then committed genocide on them when the war got out of hand.

At least this time, the show actually treated what the "heroes" were doing as morally wrong.
SG1 and SGA tended to be more black and white, so even when what the heroes did was morally reprehensible, they were the good guys so they were just and right to do it. SGU has made everything into shades of grey, which is much more realistic and I think a good thing for the franchise.

QFT.

[Lahela]

At least this time, the show actually treated what the "heroes" were doing as morally wrong.
SG1 and SGA tended to be more black and white, so even when what the heroes did was morally reprehensible, they were the good guys so they were just and right to do it. SGU has made everything into shades of grey, which is much more realistic and I think a good thing for the franchise.

I for one am thankful for this. I often felt uneasy with the idea of "rooting for" the heroes considering some of the things they did and felt even more uneasy with the fact that nobody in-show ever seriously questioned their actions, except for aliens (eg Inquisition) and then we were portrayed as the victims.

[Kaiphantom]

It's not like this was the first time that Earth has been in the wrong.

They were prepared to slaughter hundreds of Unas so we could dig a mine on their holy site.

Something our heroes were against. It's already been pointed out before that higher ups had some bad ideas from time to time, but what stood out was that our heroes didn't believe in that, and always felt there was another, better way.


They were going to give heavy water to the Eurodans to make WMDs, with no questions asked.

You get a cookie for getting closer, but in the end they came around. Daniel was always against it. Oh, also note that the heavy water was to power a shield... not WMD's. At the time, they were under the impression that the Eurondans were under attack and thus defending themselves.


They used Wraith PoWs for scientific experimentation multiple times.

The Wraith were the enemy intent on using humans for cattle... not a planet of allies. This is no different than experimenting on Goa'uld in order to remove them from host bodies.


They made a deal with Niam to turn off the Asuran aggression, instead they programed them to go to war with the Wraith, and then committed genocide on them when the war got out of hand.

The Asurans were enemies. Your train of thought is going off-track here, since all you are showing is that our heroes do bad things to bad guys in a war... not allies.


At least this time, the show actually treated what the "heroes" were doing as morally wrong.

Thank you for acknowledging that the character of the heroes we have known, has been completely destroyed. And done in such a unintelligent, ill-thought out, completely boneheaded manner that makes you wonder how they dress themselves in the morning.


Because O'Neill was often only reigned in by Daniel. There were a lot of times O'Neill wanted to do something morally questionable. Don't be over simplistic, the actions themselves are never grey - it is the situation that led to said action. The Area Bombing of German and Japanese cities in World War 2 was not grey, it was pure and simply immoral. The situation that led to it, regardless of what argument you follow is the grey area. Arguments to justify the actions of the Royal Air Force and the United States Army Air Force in WW2 continue, because it is not a clear cut situation, despite the mass DELIBERATE killing of civilians being clearly wrong. Because like it or not, in times of war, when your job is to visit violence upon your enemy, situations are rarely black and white. But even if the wrong thing is done for the right reason, even if we were to decide, for example, that the area bombing in WW2 was the right course of action, it does NOT under ANY circumstances make the action of bombing itself RIGHT, or even GREY. It is an immoral action against the backdrop of a grey situation.

Your analogy doesn't work, because all those "grey" situations took place in a hot war against enemies. Langara wasn't enemy, and indeed, they were supposedly an ally.


Pretty much. O'Neill has found himself in a position of incredibly high power, in the wake of a DISASTER (once again, remember the damage to the Pentagon caused by ONE conventional aircraft on 9/11 and tell me that the bomb on the LA ship NEEDED to go off to cause any kind of destruction). O'Neill is NOT the same man, he's had half a decade of senior command responsibility and is now trying to fight an enemy different to that he's used to. It's like a General who's used to fighting the Nazi army suddenly fighting the Taliban. It makes things harder, and commands make difficult decision. Except for rare circumstances, those that make the tough calls never used to have to make such decisions, or even support such decisions.

Your real world analogies don't work. Afghanistan wasn't an ally, and they very clearly had Osama in their country and outright refused to turn him over. You remind me much of the politicians in the wake of 9/11 who passed things like the Patriot Act. "OMG we were attacked so we need to do all this other side stuff that is stupid and doesn't reflect the real threat and if you disagree you're a terrorist!"

Congrats, you've equated Jack O'Neill with George W. Bush. Are you happy about that?

Question for you (and everyone here): Are you happy O'Neill is now Bush? Is that what you wanted for this franchise?

It sounds like you do. For a lot of us, it is not what we wanted. Maybe SGU should be renewed, say, for 4 more years? We could, like, turn that into a chant: "4 more years! 4 more years!"

At any rate, it really sounds like you're trying to excuse Jack's actions, wihih is the source of our disagreement. I can't excuse it, partly because of moral and character reasons... but mainly because it was supremely stupid when there were better options. And to date, no one has been able to offer a reasonable counter to those better options.

And since you like realism, I suppose this excuses Bush's actions, and the actions of the US, as we do what we want with the rest of the world. After all, there are terrorists out there who threaten our way of life. We were attacked. And thus what the US is doing is undertaking "grey" actions. We're really still the good guys; we just have to do stuff like capture German citizens from their country and torture them in a far off prison.

You obviously understand, right?

[Lahela]

It's already been pointed out before that higher ups had some bad ideas from time to time, but what stood out was that our heroes didn't believe in that, and always felt there was another, better way.


Woolsey said that Jack had briefed the Chairman and President - perhaps this order came from higher up the foodchain too.

[morbosfist]

You get a cookie for getting closer, but in the end they came around. Daniel was always against it. Oh, also note that the heavy water was to power a shield... not WMD's. At the time, they were under the impression that the Eurondans were under attack and thus defending themselves.They also made it clear that they would use it to strike back, just not immediately. It wasn't purely defensive, the heavy water would have turned the tide of the war.

[garhkal]

On the unas mine, Daniel was the only one against it from the start.. jack came around cause he trusts daniel.

[morrismike]

On the unas mine, Daniel was the only one against it from the start.. jack came around cause he trusts daniel.
That and the whole being surrounded by and outnumbered 50 to 1.

[D Toccs]

At any rate, it really sounds like you're trying to excuse Jack's actions, wihih is the source of our disagreement. I can't excuse it, partly because of moral and character reasons... but mainly because it was supremely stupid when there were better options. And to date, no one has been able to offer a reasonable counter to those better options.

You're missing the point completely. No one is trying to excuse or even condone Earth's actions. I don't think that anyone here agrees with what they did, you're looking for an argument where there isn't one.

It seems like you're under the impression that when we say that it was "grey", that we are somehow saying it was ok. That is not at all what is being said.

There is no Black and White, everything is always shades of grey. SGU is realistic in that it acknowledges this. In this episode, Earth acted rashly and stupidly and it got called on it. The episode treated what Earth did as wrong.
Unlike the for example in SGA where Atlantis was the good guys and Michael was the bad guy, even though what they did to him was horrific.

Black and White leads to "Flawless Heroes" which is unrealistic and quite frankly boring.

[tinerin]

Why can't you accept that O'Neill wasn't grey? Or answer this other question: Do you think someone who abuses your trust and goes through your things, is "grey"? That if you catch them doing bad things to you, they can just chuckle and say "Oops! I was just being gray" and you'll go "oh, that's alright!"?

I know grey. SG-1 already gave us that; it was called "Shades of Grey." What you're proposing is the Mayborne strategy, and we arrested him and threw him in jail for that. He was an "Earth first" kind of guy, and we're no different. O'Neill has turned into the kind of person he once denounced, so even if you call him grey, we can also call him a hypocrite. Mayborne was right after all, eh?

And this means that the heroes Stargate has shown us, have been deconstructed and destroyed. The ones today, aren't the ones we knew back then.

Anyway, you keep harping on this "grey" subject, as if it somehow magically renders everyone innocent. "He's not bad! He's... he''s just... he's just... grey! Yeah, that's it!" It's a neat way of trying to tiptoe around the moral ramifications here. Can't you just call it wrong? Something wrong, is not grey; it's wrong. It's intellectually disingenuous to try and pretend otherwise. You're smart enough to know that.

The problem with your arguments is that you're using 20/20 hindsight to say that our actions were wrong. What if we had discovered that the Langarans were negotiating with the Lucian Alliance and that they were playing both sides seeing who would make the best offer? Would our actions have been wrong then? What if we had discovered that the Langarans have been allied with the LA for months and that they were helping the LA prepare for an imminent attack on Destiny? What if we had discovered that they had also supplied the LA with Naquadriah for the bomb that was was intended to blow up Homeworld Command knowing full well what the LA's plans were? Would our actions still have been wrong?

Unless you honestly believe that attacking an "ally" who had already double-crossed us by assisting our enemy in an attempted attack on our homeworld and was planning future attacks against us would be wrong, then Earth's actions would have to be "grey".

[sholva1]

the asgard are super advanced and have been in space for thousands of years, the Tauri are infants compared to them

[Flyboy]

Something our heroes were against. It's already been pointed out before that higher ups had some bad ideas from time to time, but what stood out was that our heroes didn't believe in that, and always felt there was another, better way.



You get a cookie for getting closer, but in the end they came around. Daniel was always against it. Oh, also note that the heavy water was to power a shield... not WMD's. At the time, they were under the impression that the Eurondans were under attack and thus defending themselves.



The Wraith were the enemy intent on using humans for cattle... not a planet of allies. This is no different than experimenting on Goa'uld in order to remove them from host bodies.



The Asurans were enemies. Your train of thought is going off-track here, since all you are showing is that our heroes do bad things to bad guys in a war... not allies.



Thank you for acknowledging that the character of the heroes we have known, has been completely destroyed. And done in such a unintelligent, ill-thought out, completely boneheaded manner that makes you wonder how they dress themselves in the morning.



Your analogy doesn't work, because all those "grey" situations took place in a hot war against enemies. Langara wasn't enemy, and indeed, they were supposedly an ally.



Your real world analogies don't work. Afghanistan wasn't an ally, and they very clearly had Osama in their country and outright refused to turn him over. You remind me much of the politicians in the wake of 9/11 who passed things like the Patriot Act. "OMG we were attacked so we need to do all this other side stuff that is stupid and doesn't reflect the real threat and if you disagree you're a terrorist!"

Congrats, you've equated Jack O'Neill with George W. Bush. Are you happy about that?

Question for you (and everyone here): Are you happy O'Neill is now Bush? Is that what you wanted for this franchise?

It sounds like you do. For a lot of us, it is not what we wanted. Maybe SGU should be renewed, say, for 4 more years? We could, like, turn that into a chant: "4 more years! 4 more years!"

At any rate, it really sounds like you're trying to excuse Jack's actions, wihih is the source of our disagreement. I can't excuse it, partly because of moral and character reasons... but mainly because it was supremely stupid when there were better options. And to date, no one has been able to offer a reasonable counter to those better options.

And since you like realism, I suppose this excuses Bush's actions, and the actions of the US, as we do what we want with the rest of the world. After all, there are terrorists out there who threaten our way of life. We were attacked. And thus what the US is doing is undertaking "grey" actions. We're really still the good guys; we just have to do stuff like capture German citizens from their country and torture them in a far off prison.

You obviously understand, right?

I'm back at work now, and really don't have time to go head to head when you're so blatantly not getting what I'm even TRYING to argue. D Toccs, however, has beautifully grasped the point.

I try to be the most moral person I can be, which in my line of work is essential to TRY and be. What D Toccs has cottened on to, is that in reality - it doesn't always work like that. Enjoying that sort of moral ambiguity in fiction does NOT mean that it is excused in real life, even if you understand that it sometimes happens, and often can't be avoided at the higher levels.



You're missing the point completely. No one is trying to excuse or even condone Earth's actions. I don't think that anyone here agrees with what they did, you're looking for an argument where there isn't one.

It seems like you're under the impression that when we say that it was "grey", that we are somehow saying it was ok. That is not at all what is being said.

There is no Black and White, everything is always shades of grey. SGU is realistic in that it acknowledges this. In this episode, Earth acted rashly and stupidly and it got called on it. The episode treated what Earth did as wrong.
Unlike the for example in SGA where Atlantis was the good guys and Michael was the bad guy, even though what they did to him was horrific.

Black and White leads to "Flawless Heroes" which is unrealistic and quite frankly boring.

D Toccs, you're a legend. I'm out of the discussion now, as now I'm off leave I don't have time. Keep it up, you're a switched on guy.

[Cold Fuzz]

You're missing the point completely. No one is trying to excuse or even condone Earth's actions. I don't think that anyone here agrees with what they did, you're looking for an argument where there isn't one.

It seems like you're under the impression that when we say that it was "grey", that we are somehow saying it was ok. That is not at all what is being said.

There is no Black and White, everything is always shades of grey. SGU is realistic in that it acknowledges this. In this episode, Earth acted rashly and stupidly and it got called on it. The episode treated what Earth did as wrong.
Unlike the for example in SGA where Atlantis was the good guys and Michael was the bad guy, even though what they did to him was horrific.

Black and White leads to "Flawless Heroes" which is unrealistic and quite frankly boring.

D Toccs, Flying Officer Bennett would agree with me when I say that your post is outstanding. :cameron21: This is the heart of the premise behind "Seizure" and many of SGU's characters in general.


I'm back at work now, and really don't have time to go head to head when you're so blatantly not getting what I'm even TRYING to argue. D Toccs, however, has beautifully grasped the point.

I try to be the most moral person I can be, which in my line of work is essential to TRY and be. What D Toccs has cottened on to, is that in reality - it doesn't always work like that. Enjoying that sort of moral ambiguity in fiction does NOT mean that it is excused in real life, even if you understand that it sometimes happens, and often can't be avoided at the higher levels.




D Toccs, you're a legend. I'm out of the discussion now, as now I'm off leave I don't have time. Keep it up, you're a switched on guy.

I'm also opting out of here and the other Seizure thread as real life calls but excellent posts in that thread and here too Bennett. :cameron21:

[garhkal]

The problem with your arguments is that you're using 20/20 hindsight to say that our actions were wrong. What if we had discovered that the Langarans were negotiating with the Lucian Alliance and that they were playing both sides seeing who would make the best offer? Would our actions have been wrong then? What if we had discovered that the Langarans have been allied with the LA for months and that they were helping the LA prepare for an imminent attack on Destiny? What if we had discovered that they had also supplied the LA with Naquadriah for the bomb that was was intended to blow up Homeworld Command knowing full well what the LA's plans were? Would our actions still have been wrong?

Unless you honestly believe that attacking an "ally" who had already double-crossed us by assisting our enemy in an attempted attack on our homeworld and was planning future attacks against us would be wrong, then Earth's actions would have to be "grey".

Then of course it would have changed what we did, as we would then be in the right. BUT that would also be using 20/20 hindsight.

[mjwalshe]

no no no no
Those reactors in subs are pushing 100 MWT. Mk I is around 2 MWe and a MKII may peak out slightly higher than that. You cannot that kind of power in something like that. Look at the copper cables they make the hook up with for a clue.

when 3 rectors can power atalantis - I don't think so. And don't forget that the naquadria rectors are much more efficient a nuclear rector has to have all the extra bits to turn heat into electricity/steam.

The cables usually shown connected to the rectors are not thick enough to run a cooker obviously the writers are unfamiliar with ohms law :-)

I suspect that Sam or Rodney would hand wave it as superconducting cables.

[garhkal]

It was 5 reactors.. not 3.