PDA

View Full Version : Pro-civilian bias?



Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 07:04 AM
Hey all, it seems to me that a majority of people on here believe that the civilians are in the right and the military personnel aboard Destiny are a bunch of thugs.

Well, I find Wray's point about every military in the civilized world falling under civilian government authority to be very true. Obviously she was saying this so she could get power, but why were the other civilians following her and Rush so easily?

I was thinking specifically of Volker and Brody. Have they had a bad go of it on Destiny? Oh, probably, but how is that thew fault of the military personnel? I know a lot of civilians were pissed about having their quarters searched for missing supplies and again for the gun that killed Spencer. Why though? It doesn't make sense to me why they'd be so resentful over it. The soldiers' quarters were being checked as well, so why the big fuss?

Does this all relate to Young leaving Rush on that planet? Obviously for Rush it did, but who else knew?

Jper
April 10th, 2010, 07:15 AM
You know, I found that the episode portrayed a more pro-military view than pro-civilian view. While people here and viewers might or might not be biased to one side or another I don't know. I think it depends on the individual, person to person. However, personally I though that the character of the episode itself gave it a more pro-military aspect. Personally I think I'm not biased either way, 'cause I wouldn't want to be in either camp, and I think either camp is as right or wrong as the other. :) Certainly in a situation like this were a division like this is only to do harm and far from good.

Phenomenological
April 10th, 2010, 07:18 AM
I'd imagine it has more to do with the fact they dislike the military having the last word in everything that goes on. I would.

CnQuiZ
April 10th, 2010, 07:21 AM
Btw can anyone tell me why everyone was talkin about young leaving rush on the desert planet and yet it seems no civilian knows about rush's attempt to frame the colonel?

Jper
April 10th, 2010, 07:28 AM
I'd imagine it has more to do with the fact they dislike the military having the last word in everything that goes on. I would.

Or in Rush situation, that Young never listen to them or considers his opinion, or just consults/considers Rush i.e. when wasting power while power reserves are low. Young is far from a decent or good leader. Sure he's a leader, but not a good one. And that's a problem. Way more than the military having the last word.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 07:30 AM
I'd imagine it has more to do with the fact they dislike the military having the last word in everything that goes on. I would.

Yes, but how is this any different than their previous post, Icarus base? Or possibly their post before that, the SGC or Area 51?

These scientists are a part of the Stargate Program. They fall under the command of various military personnel of escalating ranks up to General O'Niell. Why is it now that they're suddenly chafing under the military rule?

Vapor
April 10th, 2010, 07:30 AM
I don't think the episode was entirely pro-civilian or entirely pro-military. That's not really the issue as I saw it.

Yes, it was split down the middle in terms of the balance of power in the plot, but I don't think the point of the episode was to point at one side and say "these guys are right" and "the other guys are wrong."

In the end, both sides had problems, and the episode ends with the suggestion that they need to work together if they're going to maintain any semblance of peace aboard the ship.

Ser Scot A Ellison
April 10th, 2010, 07:34 AM
Lord Hurin,


Yes, but how is this any different than their previous post, Icarus base? Or possibly their post before that, the SGC or Area 51?

These scientists are a part of the Stargate Program. They fall under the command of various military personnel of escalating ranks up to General O'Niell. Why is it now that they're suddenly chafing under the military rule?

In each of your other examples there is the possiblity of the civilians saying, "I quit I'm leaving and you can't make me stay, I'm a civilian." Not anymore. They are trapped on the ship for some indefinate period of time. As such they need to build a more normal society than they've been accustomed to in other SGC locals.

missmobius
April 10th, 2010, 07:35 AM
Hey all, it seems to me that a majority of people on here believe that the civilians are in the right and the military personnel aboard Destiny are a bunch of thugs.

Well, I find Wray's point about every military in the civilized world falling under civilian government authority to be very true. Obviously she was saying this so she could get power, but why were the other civilians following her and Rush so easily?

I was thinking specifically of Volker and Brody. Have they had a bad go of it on Destiny? Oh, probably, but how is that thew fault of the military personnel? I know a lot of civilians were pissed about having their quarters searched for missing supplies and again for the gun that killed Spencer. Why though? It doesn't make sense to me why they'd be so resentful over it. The soldiers' quarters were being checked as well, so why the big fuss?

Does this all relate to Young leaving Rush on that planet? Obviously for Rush it did, but who else knew?

Yes, I think when Young ditched Rush, it destroyed the civilians having any respect for him. (and he knows it, as he told Wray)

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 07:36 AM
Sorry, I'm not talking about a bias one way or the other on the writers' parts but on the part of the people of this forum. I've seen several posts admonishing the military for acting like barbarians when really no one was in the right.

I'm just trying to figure out why guys like Brody and Volker (especially Brody, who has had a fair amount of respect from all camps) would get on board with a mutiny so quickly and willingly. Surely they didn't have plans of mutiny at Icarus base?

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 10th, 2010, 07:37 AM
I don't think the episode was entirely pro-civilian or entirely pro-military. That's not really the issue as I saw it.

Yes, it was split down the middle in terms of the balance of power in the plot, but I don't think the point of the episode was to point at one side and say "these guys are right" and "the other guys are wrong."

In the end, both sides had problems, and the episode ends with the suggestion that they need to work together if they're going to maintain any semblance of peace aboard the ship.

Good post. I'd like to add that the ep refrained from showing a good side and a bad side, the point was for the viewer to make up their own mind, be it they support the military, civilians or neither and think they should work together.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 07:38 AM
Yes, I think when Young ditched Rush, it destroyed the civilians having any respect for him. (and he knows it, as he told Wray)

Yes, but I think Young is regretful not only for having lost the respect of others, but also for allowing himself to become a man he can't respect himself.

Ser Scot A Ellison
April 10th, 2010, 07:42 AM
Lord Hurin,


Yes, but I think Young is regretful not only for having lost the respect of others, but also for allowing himself to become a man he can't respect himself.

Why does that mean he should retain his authority. He should be willing to set it aside given that he recognizes his own failings.

hiro
April 10th, 2010, 07:42 AM
I think that the episode isn't "well we have both sides choose one and we start fighting to dead !! "
it's more a reflexion that we need both sides together to survive .


Or in Rush situation, that Young never listen to them or considers his opinion, or just consults/considers Rush i.e. when wasting power while power reserves are low. Young is far from a decent or good leader. Sure he's a leader, but not a good one. And that's a problem. Way more than the military having the last word.

I think that Young doesn't believe Rush anymore because he is the one that disobey the order to dial home ... and that bring them to the destiny

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 07:57 AM
I think that the episode isn't "well we have both sides choose one and we start fighting to dead !! "
it's more a reflexion that we need both sides together to survive .


God, I hope so. This show is very different to the other Stargate series and I like and respect that. The comraderie is just about the only element from previous shows that I dearly miss.

s09119
April 10th, 2010, 08:03 AM
Yes, but how is this any different than their previous post, Icarus base? Or possibly their post before that, the SGC or Area 51?

These scientists are a part of the Stargate Program. They fall under the command of various military personnel of escalating ranks up to General O'Niell. Why is it now that they're suddenly chafing under the military rule?

Because life on Icarus Base wasn't "military rule," it was just normality. This is a bit of a different situation, and whereas the military was just there to be their bosses and protectors at Icarus, they're the overlords here. Living on a ship ruled by force is markedly different than living on a base under guard.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 08:09 AM
Because life on Icarus Base wasn't "military rule," it was just normality. This is a bit of a different situation, and whereas the military was just there to be their bosses and protectors at Icarus, they're the overlords here. Living on a ship ruled by force is markedly different than living on a base under guard.

"Ruled by force"? When have the civilians ever had force used against them, apart from in this episode? The military were in command at Icarus and they're in command on Destiny until told otherwise by someone with the authority to do so. The civilians seemed to have gone from wondering what the status of getting home was to openly rejecting the military authority. There's no reason for it that I can see.

jelgate
April 10th, 2010, 08:15 AM
Yeah I've noticed. Didn't really care too much. Divisions are the way of GW:P

I know people might think I'm military bias but both sides were in the wrong in the Divided episode IMO.

Commander Zelix
April 10th, 2010, 08:25 AM
Frankly, I didn't feel the episode had much to do with the civilian vs military but mostly about personality. There was nothing intellectually stimulating on that front. It was either be on Rush/Wray side or Young side. The main point of the civilians seem to be that Young possibly left Rush to die on the planet. Only one dialog is about that when Wray talks about how a civilian authority is always behind the military authority (which is still the case since the ultimate authority is still back on earth).

s09119
April 10th, 2010, 08:27 AM
"Ruled by force"? When have the civilians ever had force used against them, apart from in this episode? The military were in command at Icarus and they're in command on Destiny until told otherwise by someone with the authority to do so. The civilians seemed to have gone from wondering what the status of getting home was to openly rejecting the military authority. There's no reason for it that I can see.

They have no say in anything and are subject to the authority of people with weapons who have shown they're not afraid to use them, that's what "rule by force" means. They don't need to be getting shot up to make it true.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 08:32 AM
They have no say in anything and are subject to the authority of people with weapons who have shown they're not afraid to use them, that's what "rule by force" means. They don't need to be getting shot up to make it true.

Did they have a say in anything on Icarus or at the SGC? Depends, really. They would've been under the authority of Colonel Young or General Landry, respectively. I still can't grasp what the point of contention is. The civilians and military have been treated the same. They're both subject to food rationing. They're both subject to water rationing. They're both subject to room-by-room searches when necessary. Most of all, these civilians are USED to falling under military command, so why the resentment since day one?!

jelgate
April 10th, 2010, 08:33 AM
They have no say in anything and are subject to the authority of people with weapons who have shown they're not afraid to use them, that's what "rule by force" means. They don't need to be getting shot up to make it true.

They kind of agreed to that when they signed their nondisclosure agreement

s09119
April 10th, 2010, 08:35 AM
Did they have a say in anything on Icarus or at the SGC? Depends, really. They would've been under the authority of Colonel Young or General Landry, respectively. I still can't grasp what the point of contention is. The civilians and military have been treated the same. They're both subject to food rationing. They're both subject to water rationing. They're both subject to room-by-room searches when necessary. Most of all, these civilians are USED to falling under military command, so why the resentment since day one?!

Icarus and the SGC were very different scenarios. They had the possibility of going home, there was always a link to Earth, there were plenty of supplies, it was safe, etc. Here, the civilians see things differently. If they're going to be stuck here for the rest of their lives, why should they have to live under the dictatorship of the military? And the people back on Earth are useless and have no idea what they're going through. I'd want a civilian government, too.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 08:39 AM
Icarus and the SGC were very different scenarios. They had the possibility of going home, there was always a link to Earth, there were plenty of supplies, it was safe, etc. Here, the civilians see things differently. If they're going to be stuck here for the rest of their lives, why should they have to live under the dictatorship of the military? And the people back on Earth are useless and have no idea what they're going through. I'd want a civilian government, too.

And their first attempt to get one set up is what? A nice round-table discussion? A conference? No, it's a hostile takeover of the majority of the ship and a blackmail attempt. These are intelligent people, why do something so dumb. Don't say "oh, Young wouldn't listen" because you'd be absolutely right; since they didn't bring it up before now, he'd have NOTHING to listen to!

Jper
April 10th, 2010, 08:53 AM
Sorry, I'm not talking about a bias one way or the other on the writers' parts but on the part of the people of this forum. I've seen several posts admonishing the military for acting like barbarians when really no one was in the right.

Yeah, but you will always have this. People disagreeing and having a different opinion/view is normal. :)

Pointing guns, hitting people, etc. scares people and makes them overreact, which leads to reactions like that. :)



I'm just trying to figure out why guys like Brody and Volker (especially Brody, who has had a fair amount of respect from all camps) would get on board with a mutiny so quickly and willingly. Surely they didn't have plans of mutiny at Icarus base?

I think it's simply because of the forced rule Young has over the crew. It's not like home, Icarus, the SGC or Earth in general.

Young's inability to listen or be diplomatic, and strange behavior from time to time, while the rest of the military personnel stays loyal to him and follows him - all this led to the divide. Young's actions and behavior are for a great deal responsible for the divided. Combine that with the power-hungry, eloquent character of Wray and the character of Rush and you have the perfect situation for a mutiny like this. :) Wray's eloquent, not scared of the military, including Young, and has a great deal of authority. I can easily see how Brody and Volker, due to all that has happened, would choose the side they did.


Good post. I'd like to add that the ep refrained from showing a good side and a bad side, the point was for the viewer to make up their own mind, be it they support the military, civilians or neither and think they should work together.

Yeah, it didn't show a good or bad side, which was the right way to go. I agree, it was up to us to make up our own mind. :) However, I hope the ultimate goal of the episode was to show how weaknesses of the one side, are the strong points of the other and vice versa. I do hope TPTB intended to show in the end that working together was the ultimate solution, even if the characters on-board don't realize it yet, or even want to do it.


Yes, but I think Young is regretful not only for having lost the respect of others, but also for allowing himself to become a man he can't respect himself.

I agree, he's regretful, but I still think it's too late for that. Surely he has experience with being a leader as a Colonel. He should never have done it in the first place and he should accept the consequences. IMHO, he's no longer fit to lead, and he's not fitting the position anymore either. It's not a diplomatic move to let him stay the leader, imho.



I think that Young doesn't believe Rush anymore because he is the one that disobey the order to dial home ... and that bring them to the destiny

Yeah, but Young didn't order him to dial home. He just did, by ordering another civilian to do it, without consulting or considering Rush. Rush, after all isn't the leader, Young is, and he showed that he isn't fit for the position for the first time there. It's not that I cannot let that slide, or that I don't understand his motives, but his continued short-shighted-ness is a very big problem.


God, I hope so. This show is very different to the other Stargate series and I like and respect that. The comraderie is just about the only element from previous shows that I dearly miss.

Yeah, but I've always found the immediate comradeship in stargate to be unrealistic. Sure it's nice to watch, but not the real world. I find it nice how the show actual realistic development for the alliances being build, and a development towards friendship, and not the over-stereotypical, black-white behavior of before. Also, I find it nice, next to grayish zones, that are also serious conflicts between characters, and not just the overall big-bad or enemy, with everyone against that. It was always one side, heroes, the characters we follow from episode to episode, over-perfect and unrealistic, with on the other side, the gruesome enemy or a dick like Senator Kingsey.


"Ruled by force"? When have the civilians ever had force used against them, apart from in this episode? The military were in command at Icarus and they're in command on Destiny until told otherwise by someone with the authority to do so. The civilians seemed to have gone from wondering what the status of getting home was to openly rejecting the military authority. There's no reason for it that I can see.

They use force all the time to establish their leadership. Greer shot Franklin. Young picked a physical fight with Rush. Greer always pull his gun to threat people. Etc. They might be right or they might not be, but they do use force.

Jper
April 10th, 2010, 08:54 AM
They kind of agreed to that when they signed their nondisclosure agreement

Yeah, but they signed up to be working on Icarus base, not to be stuck on Destiny.

Ser Scot A Ellison
April 10th, 2010, 08:55 AM
Jper,

I think the example of Greer shooting Franklin is a bit unfair as Greer shot Franklin after Rush told him to shoot Franklin.

Replicator Todd
April 10th, 2010, 08:58 AM
To be honest, I'm biased towards the civilians because I simply don't like the military too much in real life. :P But Young IMO isn't exactly a very good leader, of course this emphasizes these are the wrong people in the wrong place. He seems to make the entirety of the military onboard look bad.

Jper
April 10th, 2010, 09:15 AM
To be honest, I'm biased towards the civilians because I simply don't like the military too much in real life. :P But Young IMO isn't exactly a very good leader, of course this emphasizes these are the wrong people in the wrong place. He seems to make the entirety of the military onboard look bad.

It doesn't only seem so, it is so.

jelgate
April 10th, 2010, 09:18 AM
Yeah, but they signed up to be working on Icarus base, not to be stuck on Destiny.

Irrelevent. They are still on a military establishment

s09119
April 10th, 2010, 09:27 AM
Irrelevent. They are still on a military establishment

They're on an Ancient exploratory vessel. If anything, they're on a scientific establishment.

Replicator Todd
April 10th, 2010, 09:29 AM
They're on an Ancient exploratory vessel. If anything, they're on a scientific establishment.

I agree...

jelgate
April 10th, 2010, 09:31 AM
They're on an Ancient exploratory vessel. If anything, they're on a scientific establishment.

On evacuation from a military establishment. The chain of command doesn't change just because the scenery changes. Unless of course the IOA or president says different

MattSilver 3k
April 10th, 2010, 09:35 AM
On evacuation from a military establishment. The chain of command doesn't change just because the scenery changes. Unless of course the IOA or president says different

I'm curious though - if the IOA, the president and General O'Neill personally told Young to let the civvies take over, would he roll over?

carmencatalina
April 10th, 2010, 09:35 AM
I'll fully admit that, even though my brother is military and I have many friends in the military, when it comes to who calls the shots, I have a pro-civilian bias. I'm an immigrant - let's just say that I have a bad history with dictatorships, and will never be comfortable with the idea of military rule.

But that's my baggage - I think the show does a great job of making us ask the question - what is right here? What is best? What would we do?

If we weren't arguing and going back and forth on this, I think it means we weren't engaged by the episode.

Coronach
April 10th, 2010, 09:37 AM
If we weren't arguing and going back and forth on this, I think it means we weren't engaged by the episode.

I agree! :D

Inquisitor
April 10th, 2010, 09:37 AM
Probably not, I would expect Young would keep power, it's not the first time he has ignored the command at Earth.

I don't think the answer to their problem would lie with a civilian nor military government, rather a council of sorts from both sides, no last word from either side, but decisions are made democratically.

Though that won't make for good TV, so I hope they keep fighting. I was a little disappointed at the end when the civilians' plan failed.

jelgate
April 10th, 2010, 09:40 AM
I'm curious though - if the IOA, the president and General O'Neill personally told Young to let the civvies take over, would he roll over?

That would be a very interesting scenario. Although I find it hard that Jack would say that

Replicator Todd
April 10th, 2010, 09:45 AM
That would be a very interesting scenario. Although I find it hard that Jack would say that

Really? I mean since he become General he seems to be more of a military gung-ho guy but surely he is having doubts with Young and Telford both acting up.

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 10th, 2010, 09:45 AM
I'll fully admit that, even though my brother is military and I have many friends in the military, when it comes to who calls the shots, I have a pro-civilian bias. I'm an immigrant - let's just say that I have a bad history with dictatorships, and will never be comfortable with the idea of military rule.

But that's my baggage - I think the show does a great job of making us ask the question - what is right here? What is best? What would we do?

If we weren't arguing and going back and forth on this, I think it means we weren't engaged by the episode.

The thing is however, in a democracy it's only the civilian politicians who make policy. The military enacts that policy, conducts the operations and makes the orders.

The fact is even if you had a civilian leader on the Destiny, they would have to behave in a dictatorial manner, you can't in a dangerous situation call committees. When Weir was in charge of Atlantis she didn't run a democracy, she was in charge, she made the decisions and acted in a similar way to people like General Hammond or Landry. Wray in the short time she was in charge wasn't exactly acting in democratic matter, and she couldn't. To do so was to invite disaster. In reality Wray wants to have control over the ship for herself and she was willing to whip up the civilians into an anti military frenzy, when the question was who should replace Young, not should they get rid of the military.

Naonak
April 10th, 2010, 09:57 AM
They use force all the time to establish their leadership. Greer shot Franklin.
Because he was taking the dialling device, putting them all at risk.

Hell, Rush told him to. ;)


Young picked a physical fight with Rush.
Not really a simple matter of establishing leadership, the guy had just framed him for murder. That's bound to tick anyone off.


Greer always pull his gun to threat people.
"Always"? Twice in Air - once when he thought Rush might blow up the ship, and then when (admittedly) he lost it with Rush on the desert planet. Between then and this ep, I don't remember him pulling a gun on any civilians.


Etc. They might be right or they might not be, but they do use force.
I really don't know about that. They searched peoples' rooms when they thought someone was stealing water, but that included military personnel, and they can't be expected to know it was freaky alien bugs. I can't really think of any other examples, though I might be forgetting something.
Plus, It's not like the military personnel haven't done their fair share of saving everyone's asses either.

Personally, I just think the civilians (aside from Rush, who's not really had any for a while :p) lost any moral authority when they decided this was the best way to go about things.

Jper
April 10th, 2010, 10:15 AM
Because he was taking the dialling device, putting them all at risk.

Hell, Rush told him to. ;)

Sure, you're right. And I didn't say Greer was at fault, on the contrary. But fact is he used force. That was my point. :)



Not really a simple matter of establishing leadership, the guy had just framed him for murder. That's bound to tick anyone off.

Sure, but it was from something a good and decent leader, as Young should be, would need to do. And I'd never said it was simple, but that's what defines a good leader, to be able to lead even if things aren't simple. And even more, this flaw of Young, was the reason in the first place why Rush framed him for murder. If he had handled things better from the beginning, maybe things wouldn't have escalated like this.



"Always"? Twice in Air - once when he thought Rush might blow up the ship, and then when (admittedly) he lost it with Rush on the desert planet. Between then and this ep, I don't remember him pulling a gun on any civilians.

He used force in Darkness/Light to make people comply with Young's order. Not saying that this was wrong or right, but he did. He was in a detaining cell before coming to Destiny, right or not, he still used force. The confrontation between him and Wray in the first episode? He suggested to use force to restore Young's authority in Justice. Etc. I'm not saying his wrong, or right, or whatever. Greer's a great character, with flaws, I'll say that, but the point and fact is that he uses force.



I really don't know about that. They searched peoples' rooms when they thought someone was stealing water, but that included military personnel, and they can't be expected to know it was freaky alien bugs. I can't really think of any other examples, though I might be forgetting something.
Plus, It's not like the military personnel haven't done their fair share of saving everyone's asses either.

It's not about that.



Personally, I just think the civilians (aside from Rush, who's not really had any for a while :p) lost any moral authority when they decided this was the best way to go about things.

Sure, I didn't say the civilians were right to stage a coup or mutiny. That was not what the post was about.

KevinMR223
April 10th, 2010, 10:18 AM
I skimmed through the posts so sorry if I just repeat what other people have said.

I am actually pro military on this issue. And i start of with saying that i actually am not fond of the BS that comes with the military territory.

The HUGE problem here is that the civilians did a Coup D'Etat. Civilian Command is possible and probably would work better in the long run but that has to be established and developed, a constitution with rules and laws and a president is necessary. And you DO NOT get to that level by force.

Someone mentioned that they had history with a dictatorship, as do I (i am Cuban) but you have to remember a Civilian Coup D'Etat is a dictatorship as well you would just be handing the guns to someone else.

Tamara gets it perfectly when she says that as soon as they took the ship by force they declared war.
And while Wray says that civilized Countries are run by civilians she forgets the little issue that these countries have constitutions and got there through hard work, negotiations and large grueling meetings to establish that. You're not going to get anywhere by threatening to dehydrate everyone to death. Any country you look at that has been taken over by a Coup D'Etat is not exactly what I would call the most civilized country. In any stretch of the imagination.

For civilian rule they must come together and establish it as one group, only then can you have a functioning "government" without this divide.

And just in a side not Wray is a power hungry deluded character. She has made things soooo much worse on the ship now. She has no idea how to go about doing anything or being a leader. If a government is ever established they will have to keep her as far away as possible from that.

In fact if SGU decides to eventually go in this direction (which i Hope they do) the perfect candidate is Chloe. This would finally give her character some much needed meaning. She straddles the line (until this episode) perfectly. I know people hate her but if you think about it they could develop her into quite the civilian leader. the best leader is one without ulterior motives.

KevinMR223
April 10th, 2010, 10:27 AM
I skimmed through the posts so sorry if I just repeat what other people have said.

I am actually pro military on this issue. And i start of with saying that i actually am not fond of the BS that comes with the military territory.

The HUGE problem here is that the civilians did a Coup D'Etat. Civilian Command is possible and probably would work better in the long run but that has to be established and developed, a constitution with rules and laws and a president is necessary. And you DO NOT get to that level by force.

Someone mentioned that they had history with a dictatorship, as do I (i am Cuban) but you have to remember a Civilian Coup D'Etat is a dictatorship as well you would just be handing the guns to someone else.

Tamara gets it perfectly when she says that as soon as they took the ship by force they declared war.
And while Wray says that civilized Countries are run by civilians she forgets the little issue that these countries have constitutions and got there through hard work, negotiations and large grueling meetings to establish that. You're not going to get anywhere by threatening to dehydrate everyone to death. Any country you look at that has been taken over by a Coup D'Etat is not exactly what I would call the most civilized country. In any stretch of the imagination.

For civilian rule they must come together and establish it as one group, only then can you have a functioning "government" without this divide.

And just in a side not Wray is a power hungry deluded character. She has made things soooo much worse on the ship now. She has no idea how to go about doing anything or being a leader. If a government is ever established they will have to keep her as far away as possible from that.

In fact if SGU decides to eventually go in this direction (which i Hope they do) the perfect candidate is Chloe. This would finally give her character some much needed meaning. She straddles the line (until this episode) perfectly. I know people hate her but if you think about it they could develop her into quite the civilian leader. the best leader is one without ulterior motives.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 10:28 AM
He used force in Darkness/Light to make people comply with Young's order. Not saying that this was wrong or right, but he did. He was in a detaining cell before coming to Destiny, right or not, he still used force. The confrontation between him and Wray in the first episode? He suggested to use force to restore Young's authority in Justice. Etc. I'm not saying his wrong, or right, or whatever. Greer's a great character, with flaws, I'll say that, but the point and fact is that he uses force.

I admire the fact that you stated that without going into an anti-Greer "what a ruthless barbarian" tirade as many other posters seem to love doing. Greer applies force where ordered to or where he sees fit. He applies only enough force to get the job done (which includes none if he can make his point through vague threat of force) and no more than that. Just as a US Marine is trained to do. Cheers, have some green :)

Whoops, scratch that. Apparently I need to spread a little love around to others first.

Jper
April 10th, 2010, 10:43 AM
I admire the fact that you stated that without going into an anti-Greer "what a ruthless barbarian" tirade as many other posters seem to love doing. Greer applies force where ordered to or where he sees fit. He applies only enough force to get the job done (which includes none if he can make his point through vague threat of force) and no more than that. Just as a US Marine is trained to do. Cheers, have some green :)

Whoops, scratch that. Apparently I need to spread a little love around to others first.

Well thank you. I agree with you, but I am glad that you say he uses force. And that's the whole point, right or wrong, in the end, "force" will never be the solution. :)

garhkal
April 10th, 2010, 11:43 AM
Yes, but how is this any different than their previous post, Icarus base? Or possibly their post before that, the SGC or Area 51?

These scientists are a part of the Stargate Program. They fall under the command of various military personnel of escalating ranks up to General O'Niell. Why is it now that they're suddenly chafing under the military rule?

I think a lot of it is that maybe they expect when elsewhere like it was on atlantis, it would be a CIV controled facility with mil backing, rather than mil controled like back on earth.


They kind of agreed to that when they signed their nondisclosure agreement

Actually signing a NDA is not an agreement of "I agree to be under X rule". It is an agreement to not disclose what you find out/learn etc...


Irrelevent. They are still on a military establishment

Only cause the military has decided it to be so. Remember SGA? Atlantis was also under attack from the wraith but it remained with a CIVILIAN in charge for 3 full seasons!


When Weir was in charge of Atlantis she didn't run a democracy, she was in charge, she made the decisions and acted in a similar way to people like General Hammond or Landry

Diff there, to me at least, is that young does not seem to listen to what the others say, where as Wier did.

jelgate
April 10th, 2010, 11:59 AM
.



Actually signing a NDA is not an agreement of "I agree to be under X rule". It is an agreement to not disclose what you find out/learn etc...Still when civilians agree to work for the military thry agree to follow thier rules.




Only cause the military has decided it to be so. Remember SGA? Atlantis was also under attack from the wraith but it remained with a CIVILIAN in charge for 3 full seasons!

Actually the president said so.

Lahela
April 10th, 2010, 12:26 PM
I really don't get where this idea comes from that the people working on Icarus were under military command. Have we seen any evidence at all that it wasn't a scientific project with military protection and support? Like Atlantis? Where has it ever been said that the military were in charge before the evacuation?

jelgate
April 10th, 2010, 12:28 PM
I really don't get where this idea comes from that the people working on Icarus were under military command. Have we seen any evidence at all that it wasn't a scientific project with military protection and support? Like Atlantis? Where has it ever been said that the military were in charge before the evacuation?
Where did they say it wasn't?

I think given that it was headed by two full birds it was a military base with civilian help. Like the SGC

Lahela
April 10th, 2010, 12:31 PM
Where did they say it wasn't?

I think given that it was headed by two full birds it was a military base with civilian help. Like the SGC

Great comeback ;)

I'm just asking for evidence, seeing as folks seem to be so certain. :)

Coronach
April 10th, 2010, 12:36 PM
Where did they say it wasn't?

I think given that it was headed by two full birds it was a military base with civilian help. Like the SGC

Given the nature of the 9th Chevron project and why Icarus Base existed in the first place, I would disagree. The base was on the Icarus Planet because it had unique properties that could be used to dial the 9th Chevron. Add to this the fact that the majority (if not all) of the scientists are civilian, and it begins to look like more of a scientific project with military protection...given that the SGC program is military-run anyways.

Naonak
April 10th, 2010, 12:37 PM
Sure, I didn't say the civilians were right to stage a coup or mutiny. That was not what the post was about.
Oh, that was just my general opinion on the situation, rather than specifically replying to you. :)

Greer certainly has his issues with Wray, but apart from that, he and the military as a whole have done nothing more than was necessary to maintain order (eg. Darkness/Light) and some kind of structure. I've not seen a particular effort to force the civilians to submit to their authority. Young willingly ceded authority to Wray in Justice, and was adamantly against using force to maintain it when Greer suggested it. He's shown more regret for and seemed more willing to move past the whole 'framing for murder/abandoning to die' thing, too.

Neither side's perfect, clearly, but I think Young's mostly done a decent job, except for abandoning Rush, and seems a better option than Rush and Wray, who've spent this whole time scheming, plotting and undermining Young instead of trying to go about things in a better way.

All my interpretation, obviously. What a crazy show. :D

KEK
April 10th, 2010, 12:49 PM
The civilians would have been no more under the 'command' of the military on Icarus than an employer is of an employee. Young might have been in a position to tell the various civilians there what to do, but ultimately if they wanted to leave the job then they obviously would have been able to. I think it's safe to assume the civilians on board Destiny are no longer in the employ of the US military.

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 10th, 2010, 12:51 PM
I really don't get where this idea comes from that the people working on Icarus were under military command. Have we seen any evidence at all that it wasn't a scientific project with military protection and support? Like Atlantis? Where has it ever been said that the military were in charge before the evacuation?

Let's see there's a full bird Colonel in charge of the base, giving orders to scientists. When Rush tried to dial the 9th chevron the first time it was Young that ordered him to shut it down, seems to me Young was pretty in charge.

Coronach
April 10th, 2010, 12:54 PM
Let's see there's a full bird Colonel in charge of the base, giving orders to scientists. When Rush tried to dial the 9th chevron the first time it was Young that ordered him to shut it down, seems to me Young was pretty in charge.

Young was in charge insofar as he called the shots as to the safety and security of the base and those in it. We have no knowledge that he had any sort of control beyond that. He certainly would have had no control to tell the scientists what to do and when on any given day.

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 10th, 2010, 01:01 PM
Young was in charge insofar as he called the shots as to the safety and security of the base and those in it. We have no knowledge that he had any sort of control beyond that. He certainly would have had no control to tell the scientists what to do and when on any given day.

When someone has the ability to control what people are doing by simply citing safety and security, they are in charge.

jelgate
April 10th, 2010, 01:01 PM
Given the nature of the 9th Chevron project and why Icarus Base existed in the first place, I would disagree. The base was on the Icarus Planet because it had unique properties that could be used to dial the 9th Chevron. Add to this the fact that the majority (if not all) of the scientists are civilian, and it begins to look like more of a scientific project with military protection...given that the SGC program is military-run anyways.
That means nothing. Looking back at the SGC example a vast majority of the scientist theire were civilians (Yes I know Carter which is why I said majority) and it was still run by the military

wargrafix
April 10th, 2010, 01:07 PM
Just like in real life, military is a mess. I've had to work with airforce and they can be quite arrogant and stupid.

The civilian side is always the voice of reason. The fact that guns were drawn against civilians in this episode shows that the military is forcing control. Greer is an idiot and I hope they phase him out soon.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 01:09 PM
Just like in real life, military is a mess. I've had to work with airforce and they can be quite arrogant and stupid.

The civilian side is always the voice of reason. The fact that guns were drawn against civilians in this episode shows that the military is forcing control. Greer is an idiot and I hope they phase him out soon.

Did you even watch the other shows? They're military science fiction and the Stargate franchise virtually invented it.

Coronach
April 10th, 2010, 01:14 PM
When someone has the ability to control what people are doing by simply citing safety and security, they are in charge.

This may be the case, but it's not the sort of "in-charge" I'm talking about. When Young has Eli (a civilian) working around the clock, and dictates the everyday life of the civilians even in a situation lacking danger, then I think there's a problem.

I've never argued that Young (or someone more military-minded) shouldn't be in charge when it comes to emergency military situations (i.e. aliens boarding the ship, Rush is about to blow up the planet, etc..). Someone more skilled in tactics and combat situations should of course be the go-to person, just like Young should take into account the scientists expertise when it comes to where to divert power when aliens are attacking (e.g. shields or weapons). Luckily, he listened to Eli when he said Rush was right.



That means nothing. Looking back at the SGC example a vast majority of the scientist theire were civilians (Yes I know Carter which is why I said majority) and it was still run by the military

This is true, but that military still took orders from civilians (i.e. the IOA, the president). It is true that the president (apparently) backs Young as the one in charge, but the situation aboard Destiny and that of the SGC and Icarus Base are nearly incomparable. For example, any civilian could opt out of either of the latter situations, but they are completely stuck in the former.

wargrafix
April 10th, 2010, 01:18 PM
They need to set up a government, or at least a structure where civilians have rights. Honestly I would have been a part of an uprising had it happened in real life.

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 10th, 2010, 01:18 PM
Just like in real life, military is a mess. I've had to work with airforce and they can be quite arrogant and stupid.

The civilian side is always the voice of reason. The fact that guns were drawn against civilians in this episode shows that the military is forcing control. Greer is an idiot and I hope they phase him out soon.

Yup with that attitude no wonder no one in the military got on with you.

jelgate
April 10th, 2010, 01:21 PM
This may be the case, but it's not the sort of "in-charge" I'm talking about. When Young has Eli (a civilian) working around the clock, and dictates the everyday life of the civilians even in a situation lacking danger, then I think there's a problem.

I've never argued that Young (or someone more military-minded) shouldn't be in charge when it comes to emergency military situations (i.e. aliens boarding the ship, Rush is about to blow up the planet, etc..). Someone more skilled in tactics and combat situations should of course be the go-to person, just like Young should take into account the scientists expertise when it comes to where to divert power when aliens are attacking (e.g. shields or weapons). Luckily, he listened to Eli when he said Rush was right.



This is true, but that military still took orders from civilians (i.e. the IOA, the president). It is true that the president (apparently) backs Young as the one in charge, but the situation aboard Destiny and that of the SGC and Icarus Base are nearly incomparable. For example, any civilian could opt out of either of the latter situations, but they are completely stuck in the former.

Civilian contracts usually point out the threat of attack under military employment. I hardly think they say you stop obeying when said military is attacked. The same rules and the president's orders stand

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 01:21 PM
They need to set up a government, or at least a structure where civilians have rights. Honestly I would have been a part of an uprising had it happened in real life.

Ok, suggestions then? I'm perfectly willing to listen to reason, but "teh millitery suxx cuz I sayd so!" isn't such.

Coronach
April 10th, 2010, 01:26 PM
Civilian contracts usually point out the threat of attack under military employment. I hardly think they say you stop obeying when said military is attacked. The same rules and the president's orders stand

So, I don't disagree with you and I'm not sure I really know what you're responding to in my post, but I'll say this (as hopefully a proper response):

The real test of who ought to obey whom and when will come in next week's episode. As we know:

It seems a bunch of the civilians end up really liking the planet they're on and want to stay. It'll be interesting if people still think Young has the right to command them back aboard the ship, and it'll be even more interesting to see how Young reacts to such a situation.

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 10th, 2010, 01:26 PM
They need to set up a government, or at least a structure where civilians have rights. Honestly I would have been a part of an uprising had it happened in real life.

A government with 80 people? That would get silly fast. Not to mention within any democracy their is still a dictatorial element, presidents and prime ministers of democracies are empowered to make snap decisions in emergency situations without consultation. Whoever you stick in charge of the Destiny is going to have to make snap decisions and will not be able to form committees to make every decision.

Coronach
April 10th, 2010, 01:29 PM
A government with 80 people? That would get silly fast. Not to mention within any democracy their is still a dictatorial element, presidents and prime ministers of democracies are empowered to make snap decisions in emergency situations without consultation. Whoever you stick in charge of the Destiny is going to have to make snap decisions and will not be able to form committees to make every decision.

I totally agree!! This is the point I wanted to make, but I'm glad you brought it up first. Democratic governments of today are a good analogy to look at.

Young (or some designated leader of some sort) should have the power to make snap decisions in emergency situations. However, I think this power should not extend too far out of this (at least for the civilians aboard). Additionally (as with democratic governments), the people should have the ability to vote the person in charge out if they do not agree with their leadership.

jelgate
April 10th, 2010, 01:30 PM
So, I don't disagree with you and I'm not sure I really know what you're responding to in my post, but I'll say this (as hopefully a proper response):

The real test of who ought to obey whom and when will come in next week's episode. As we know:

It seems a bunch of the civilians end up really liking the planet they're on and want to stay. It'll be interesting if people still think Young has the right to command them back aboard the ship, and it'll be even more interesting to see how Young reacts to such a situation.

Because I though we were debating

andr3w_iii
April 10th, 2010, 01:31 PM
I like this ep it was good, The way the civilians went about it was wrong, Military responds to threats like they did, ah and the commanding officer at Icarus base was colonel Young so it was under military control, Camille was nothing more than the HR person of the base. what I think all u pro civs want is more like SGA where a civ was in charge. hey though u all wanted something different in SGU, I like the conflict and chloe been a part that was not expected, Eli has to be the only neutral character in the show.
This is just my point of view

Coronach
April 10th, 2010, 01:32 PM
Because I though we were debating

Debating what, though? I didn't disagree that the civilians might have signed away some rights for particular military situations. Or if I did, I didn't mean to make it seem that way. I've been trying to make it obvious that I'm not anti-military, and don't necessarily disagree with certain aspects of martial law.

Kaiphantom
April 10th, 2010, 01:40 PM
Martial law is only supposed to be temporary, and only in the face of a grave threat that can't be handled without it. Military dictatorships have mostly all been bad throughout history, and there is a very good reason why that is. As a student of history, I agree with the founding father of the US, who deliberately put the military under the control of a civil authority; namely, the President. Only Congress(a civilian body) can declare war or authorize use of military force. And the President(another civilian) is the commander-in-chief, and gives the direct orders once authority for action has been given from Congress.

There's a very good reason why this is. If you need proof, consider that the most advanced and peaceful nations on this Earth, have the military under civil control. Military dictatorships don't work out too well.

That said, this was also as much about personality clashes. But I do agree that Young needs to learn to subject himself to civil control on the ship (Earth doesn't count). In an emergency, sure, he can take actions. But there should be some civilian authority on the ship that runs things.

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 01:46 PM
A government with 80 people? That would get silly fast. Not to mention within any democracy their is still a dictatorial element, presidents and prime ministers of democracies are empowered to make snap decisions in emergency situations without consultation. Whoever you stick in charge of the Destiny is going to have to make snap decisions and will not be able to form committees to make every decision.

Yet it is BETTER than a military dictatorship.

jelgate
April 10th, 2010, 01:50 PM
Yet it is BETTER than a military dictatorship.

I don't see how a dictatorship under civilians is any better. In fact its quite the same

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 10th, 2010, 01:50 PM
Martial law is only supposed to be temporary, and only in the face of a grave threat that can't be handled without it. Military dictatorships have mostly all been bad throughout history, and there is a very good reason why that is. As a student of history, I agree with the founding father of the US, who deliberately put the military under the control of a civil authority; namely, the President. Only Congress(a civilian body) can declare war or authorize use of military force. And the President(another civilian) is the commander-in-chief, and gives the direct orders once authority for action has been given from Congress.

There's a very good reason why this is. If you need proof, consider that the most advanced and peaceful nations on this Earth, have the military under civil control. Military dictatorships don't work out too well.

That said, this was also as much about personality clashes. But I do agree that Young needs to learn to subject himself to civil control on the ship (Earth doesn't count). In an emergency, sure, he can take actions. But there should be some civilian authority on the ship that runs things.

Let's use an example here, if we replace Destiny with a base in Afghanistan and 60 or so civilian contractors have to take shelter there, does the base suddenly fall under civilian control? No it remains under military command. Civilian leader with regards to the military make policy, but the military makes the orders to carry out said policy.

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 10th, 2010, 01:51 PM
I don't see how a dictatorship under civilians is any better. In fact its quite the same

Worse actually because under the military there is a structure and there are rules. They're aren't when it comes to civilians.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 01:53 PM
I don't see how a dictatorship under civilians is any better. In fact its quite the same

Haven't you heard?! Military personnel are inherently untrustworthy, violent, arrogant and unfit to command. :rolleyes:

carmencatalina
April 10th, 2010, 01:54 PM
Dictatorships are almost always in some way military - I can't think of a single dictator that managed to stay in power without the force of the military behind him.

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 01:57 PM
I don't see how a dictatorship under civilians is any better. In fact its quite the same

what ?

Last i heard people could get rid of a president by not voting for him after his term finishes.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 01:57 PM
Dictatorships are almost always in some way military - I can't think of a single dictator that managed to stay in power without the force of the military behind him.

That's because you're thinking in terms of nations. What about on a merchant ship? What about Atlantis? Sure, they have their military/ security behind them, but they aren't military.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 01:58 PM
what ?

Last i heard people could get rid of a president by not voting for him after his term finishes.

Last I heard, that's far from a sure bet.

jelgate
April 10th, 2010, 01:59 PM
what ?

Last i heard people could get rid of a president by not voting for him after his term finishes.

But that is not a dictarship. What the civilians are doing would just gone from a military dictarship to a civilian one

carmencatalina
April 10th, 2010, 02:00 PM
That's because you're thinking in terms of nations. What about on a merchant ship? What about Atlantis? Sure, they have their military/ security behind them, but they aren't military.

What I'm trying to say is - if one person wants to keep command over a larger group of people, and those people don't want that person in command, the only way is by using force/weapons.

The better options are (1) pick a person the people do want in command, (2) have the person they don't like not in complete command. Otherwise, you are sitting there, waiting for the revolution to come.

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 10th, 2010, 02:00 PM
Dictatorships are almost always in some way military - I can't think of a single dictator that managed to stay in power without the force of the military behind him.

Not that simple though. Having the military at least partially on side is necessary but they often resist dictatorships. In Nazi Germany it was the German Army that organised most of the assassination attempts against Hitler, German military officers leaked intelligence to the Allies, and the German army thoroughly despised the SS who were the true power in Nazi Germany.

KEK
April 10th, 2010, 02:00 PM
But that is not a dictarship. What the civilians are doing would just gone from a military dictarship to a civilian one

To be fair, we don't really know how things would have played out.

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 02:00 PM
Let's use an example here, if we replace Destiny with a base in Afghanistan and 60 or so civilian contractors have to take shelter there, does the base suddenly fall under civilian control? No it remains under military command. Civilian leader with regards to the military make policy, but the military makes the orders to carry out said policy.

No you can't because:

1. US military can't re-supply on the destiny.
2. They're not on earth.

P.S A civilian president still controls the military in afghanistan...he can pull em out anytime he wants ;)

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 10th, 2010, 02:03 PM
No you can't because:

1. US military can't re-supply on the destiny.
2. They're not on earth.

P.S A civilian president still controls the military in afghanistan...he can pull em out anytime he wants ;)
OK so surround the base with Taliban. They can't get out, they can't be resupplied, would they still fall under civilian control if civilians were present?

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 02:04 PM
But that is not a dictarship. What the civilians are doing would just gone from a military dictarship to a civilian one

"Every action has an equal and opposite reaction."

The military forced there hand and that was the only way because young doesn't listen to any civilian.

Coronach
April 10th, 2010, 02:05 PM
OK so surround the base with Taliban. They can't get out, they can't be resupplied, would they still fall under civilian control if civilians were present?

At that moment? No, because such a situation is clearly a military emergency situation.

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 02:06 PM
OK so surround the base with Taliban. They can't get out, they can't be resupplied, would they still fall under civilian control if civilians were present?

Put an ancient shield around the base and the civilians can play football!

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 02:07 PM
"Every action has an equal and opposite reaction."

The military forced there hand and that was the only way because young doesn't listen to any civilian.

Do you disagree that the military's hand was forced when they took back the ship?

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 10th, 2010, 02:08 PM
Put an ancient shield around the base and the civilians can play football!

So I take it you don't have a serious answer then?

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 02:11 PM
So I take it you don't have a serious answer then?

Your example doesn't fit the situation the destiny is in.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 02:13 PM
Your example doesn't fit the situation the destiny is in.

How so?

-Military establishment, check
-Civilians there due to emergency, check
-No way out and no hope of help or supplies, check

What's missing?

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 10th, 2010, 02:13 PM
Your example doesn't fit the situation the destiny is in.

Fits it fine. Plenty of situations on earth where a command has been cut off, with both military and civilian personnel and the military remain in charge.

jelgate
April 10th, 2010, 02:14 PM
"Every action has an equal and opposite reaction."

The military forced there hand and that was the only way because young doesn't listen to any civilian.Yeah right. Just because he doesn't agree doesn't mean Young doesn't listen

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 02:15 PM
Do you disagree that the military's hand was forced when they took back the ship?

The military forced there hand FIRST.

All of this could have been avoided if young listened to the scientists about the ship decisions rather than using his own head which clearly doesn't know anything about the ship. He was willing to fire on the alien ships even though rush and eli told him that the shield would fail and they'd be a sitting duck without the ancient shield. The civilians dont want to poke there noses in the military decision.

I can see this heading down the BSG route!

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 10th, 2010, 02:18 PM
All of this could have been avoided if young listened to the scientists about the ship decisions rather than using his own head which clearly doesn't know anything about the ship. He was willing to fire on the alien ships even though rush and eli told him that the shield would fail and they'd be a sitting duck without the ancient shield. The civilians dont want to poke there noses in the military decision.


Wouldn't Eli and Rush arguing with Young about whether to fire the weapons be civilians poking their noses in a military decision?

carmencatalina
April 10th, 2010, 02:21 PM
Wouldn't Eli and Rush arguing with Young about whether to fire the weapons be civilians poking their noses in a military decision?

I think not - in this case, Eli and Rush are the experts on what will or won't keep the ship intact. It is a bit weird, because on Earth, that expert would be military. But not here.

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 02:22 PM
How so?

-Military establishment, check
-Civilians there due to emergency, check
-No way out and no hope of help or supplies, check

What's missing?

Its much more complicated than that. For one the military is answerable to the govt on earth and military personnel can also be court marshalled.

Earth can't do anything to young if he stops using the stones!

carmencatalina
April 10th, 2010, 02:23 PM
Also, the weird thing here (which wouldn't be true in an Earth situation) is that the experts on the weapons, shields, basically all the tech are the civilians. They know more than the military in this case. To not have their input is worse than dumb, it is suicidal.

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 02:25 PM
Wouldn't Eli and Rush arguing with Young about whether to fire the weapons be civilians poking their noses in a military decision?

It would be if they were lecturing them about there rifles! :P

Fact of the matter is that the destiny is the scientists specialization and taking care of hostile aliens is the military's.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 02:25 PM
Its much more complicated than that. For one the military is answerable to the govt on earth and military personnel can also be court marshalled.

Earth can't do anything to young if he stops using the stones!

But the hypothetical base in Afghanistan answers to no one and their personnel is above the law? Huh?

Young stopping using the stones doesn't prevent anyone else from using them. I think after this coup d'etat, he's definitely not going to be willing to stop people from doing that.

Wait, I'm at a loss to recall a time when Young DID prevent anyone from using the stones, except in Space, which was justified.

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 02:29 PM
But the hypothetical base in Afghanistan answers to no one and their personnel is above the law? Huh?

Young stopping using the stones doesn't prevent anyone else from using them. I think after this coup d'etat, he's definitely not going to be willing to stop people from doing that.

Wait, I'm at a loss to recall a time when Young DID prevent anyone from using the stones, except in Space, which was justified.

How long would the base be cut off from the rest of the military ? a month ? two ?

Chances are the destiny cant get back to earth and the civilians dont want to live like cattle for the rest of there lives. Plus the good part of the first 10 episodes there wasn't any enemy so why were the military gun tottling ?

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 02:33 PM
How long would the base be cut off from the rest of the military ? a month ? two ?

Chances are the destiny cant get back to earth and the civilians dont want to live like cattle for the rest of there lives. Plus the good part of the first 10 episodes there wasn't any enemy so why were the military gun tottling ?

Why not have the guns with them at all times? It looked to be only sidearms anyway. They didn't know who or what was in this section of space. Besides, when did the soldiers having guns become a bad thing? Should the civilians have them instead, or would you rather they be kept with the guys who are trained to use them if the need arises?

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 02:41 PM
Why not have the guns with them at all times? It looked to be only sidearms anyway. They didn't know who or what was in this section of space. Besides, when did the soldiers having guns become a bad thing? Should the civilians have them instead, or would you rather they be kept with the guys who are trained to use them if the need arises?

I'd have the guns locked up! The military can have them again when the need arises.

Civilians shouldn't by anywhere near the guns unless there's an emergency and greater numbers are required to tackle hostile aliens.

mjwalshe
April 10th, 2010, 02:42 PM
Yes, but how is this any different than their previous post, Icarus base? Or possibly their post before that, the SGC or Area 51?

These scientists are a part of the Stargate Program. They fall under the command of various military personnel of escalating ranks up to General O'Niell. Why is it now that they're suddenly chafing under the military rule?

Yes that always struck me as odd effectively earth has been at war for over a decade and the non military people who work with the stargate all part of their respective scientific civil services( and I would bet a few of them would actually be reporting to their secret services as well) And having worked in related fields and knowing a few other people who have, its not true to say they are all really "civilian" apart from Chloe and a small number of the scientists who might not be career civil servants . The Career civil service people would side with Young I suspect.

All scientific civil services have direct analogs for military rank and if you work for them your civil service grade maps across to the military rank and you get treated as a courtesy as that rank.

I rember arcane discussions in British Telecom about what “rank” the various pay grades mapped to.

And I rember a friend who worked in disaster planning attending a course with both BT Civil service and military attending where the course instructions where quiet detailed as to what “Uniform” would to be worn for the evening do.

What is really strange that senior scientists would kowtow to Wray who they would see as some “girl “from HR who they would outrank, you can just imagine how Mckay would take this.

Naonak
April 10th, 2010, 02:48 PM
I'd have the guns locked up! The military can have them again when the need arises.
Doesn't seem very practical. If the ship's boarded or something, a significant area of the ship could be taken and people killed by the time they get the weapons out.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 02:51 PM
I'd have the guns locked up! The military can have them again when the need arises.

Civilians shouldn't by anywhere near the guns unless there's an emergency and greater numbers are required to tackle hostile aliens.

And who should have the key or passcode? What if that person is on the other side of the ship when aliens attack? What if they can't make radio contact to tell anyone what the code is? What if in the time it takes that person to get to the control room, these aliens have killed several crew members?

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 02:53 PM
Doesn't seem very practical. If the ship's boarded or something, a significant area of the ship could be taken and people killed by the time they get the weapons out.

They'd have enough time to get there weapons. Aliens ships cant approach without being detected and the ancient shields last a while longer than others.

mjwalshe
April 10th, 2010, 02:55 PM
I really don't get where this idea comes from that the people working on Icarus were under military command. Have we seen any evidence at all that it wasn't a scientific project with military protection and support? Like Atlantis? Where has it ever been said that the military were in charge before the evacuation?

because they would be members of the USA's or another IOA member state civilservice they would overwelmingly be carear civil servants who arnt exactly 100% "civilans" presombly wray is ment to be a prc IOA nominee - why would a US civil servants side with her against Young

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 02:56 PM
They'd have enough time to get there weapons. Aliens ships cant approach without being detected and the ancient shields last a while longer than others.

Than other that we've seen. Destiny's shields didn't last as long as that single enemy ship's did. Who knows that other nasty races are out there? What if something came back through the gate with them, ala the sand bugs and the Riitu from SG1?

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 02:59 PM
And who should have the key or passcode? What if that person is on the other side of the ship when aliens attack? What if they can't make radio contact to tell anyone what the code is? What if in the time it takes that person to get to the control room, these aliens have killed several crew members?

So aliens would swoop inside the destiny just like that ? The shields on the destiny are quite good!

Plus young, rush, wray can keep the passcode along with TJ.

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 03:03 PM
Than other that we've seen. Destiny's shields didn't last as long as that single enemy ship's did. Who knows that other nasty races are out there? What if something came back through the gate with them, ala the sand bugs and the Riitu from SG1?

They'd be able to get there guns when the situation arises.

Dont tell me guns aren't locked in military bases.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 03:04 PM
So aliens would swoop inside the destiny just like that ? The shields on the destiny are quite good!

Plus young, rush, wray can keep the passcode along with TJ.

Fine, fine. Lock the weapons up because clearly any and all military personnel are ungrounded human beings, prone to shooting any civilian who speaks to them. Just as they have done at least once in every episode. :rolleyes:

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 03:04 PM
They'd be able to get there guns when the situation arises.

Dont tell me guns aren't locked in military bases.

Not ALL of them. Have you ever heard of a patrol?

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 03:07 PM
Fine, fine. Lock the weapons up because clearly any and all military personnel are ungrounded human beings, prone to shooting any civilian who speaks to them. Just as they have done at least once in every episode. :rolleyes:

A civilian has been shot even though there was no danger to the person who shot him.

Fact of the matter is that military personnel are also human beings and as such are prone to make mistakes and for that reason they should have limited access to guns until the situation demands it.

mjwalshe
April 10th, 2010, 03:07 PM
Worse actually because under the military there is a structure and there are rules. They're aren't when it comes to civilians.

No your wrong here as they are all effectively senior civil service (ie not local government) employees they do have a structure and it maps directly onto military rank as well.

Young is an O6 which is a GS15 which I suspect that some of the senior scientists would be on as the lead on Atlantis I could see Rodney being on this giving him parity with Sam – Weir was probably an even higher grade.

Kaiphantom
April 10th, 2010, 03:08 PM
Let's use an example here, if we replace Destiny with a base in Afghanistan and 60 or so civilian contractors have to take shelter there, does the base suddenly fall under civilian control? No it remains under military command. Civilian leader with regards to the military make policy, but the military makes the orders to carry out said policy.

Bad Analogy, sorry. Destiny isn't a firebase; for one thing, those in the firebase *can* get back to their lives. Those in Destiny cannot. In short, Destiny must form it's own society for long-term survival.


Worse actually because under the military there is a structure and there are rules. They're aren't when it comes to civilians.

I'm not sure where you get your information, but there *ARE* rules for civilian government. Seriously? Have you taken a look around and noticed this thing called "laws" that all civilized societies have adopted as their rules and codes of conduct? Thing is, you're trying to say that the civilians on Destiny would have made a civilian dictatorship, despite there being NO EVIDENCE that they would do this! It's ludacris on the face of it; they wouldn't go from one dictatorship to another. In fact, according to history, once civilians overthrow their government in a revolution, they institute a fairer government. You're welcome to try and point out one instance where this hasn't happened, but I bet you can't.

Short answer: Destiny would be better off with the civilians in charge. At least a power-sharing agreement. If you disagree with me, then I as the military dictator say that you should shut up and die. And you'll listen to me, because you prefer a military dictatorship.

I trust I've made my point.

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 03:10 PM
Not ALL of them. Have you ever heard of a patrol?

Where would they go on patrols ?

If its on the destiny then the ship would already warn them that a ship is close by and they can get there guns.

If its on another planet then they'd obviously be given guns when they walk through the gate.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 03:17 PM
A civilian has been shot even though there was no danger to the person who shot him.

You mean Franklin? Ah yes, stranding the team that is searching for a way to save the people on the ship. THAT'S not putting people in danger :rolleyes: Besides, Greer (apparently, head psychopath) shot him in the arm. It was healed by Justice. He could have shot Franklin in the head or in the torso, possibly damaging the heart of lungs. Anyway, need I remind you who told Greer to shoot in the first place?


Fact of the matter is that military personnel are also human beings and as such are prone to make mistakes and for that reason they should have limited access to guns until the situation demands it.

Right, because they're not trained in the use of firearms and when to use/ not use them.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 03:19 PM
Short answer: Destiny would be better off with the civilians in charge. At least a power-sharing agreement. If you disagree with me, then I as the military dictator say that you should shut up and die. And you'll listen to me, because you prefer a military dictatorship.

I trust I've made my point.

Ummm, not really. When did Young ever say "shut up and die if you disagree with me"? As far as I know, Wray is "in the loop" as far as overseeing the crew goes. Wasn't she given everyone's personnel files to see where they'd fit in best?

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 03:20 PM
You mean Franklin? Ah yes, stranding the team that is searching for a way to save the people on the ship. THAT'S not putting people in danger :rolleyes: Besides, Greer (apparently, head psychopath) shot him in the arm. It was healed by Justice. He could have shot Franklin in the head or in the torso, possibly damaging the heart of lungs. Anyway, need I remind you who told Greer to shoot in the first place?



Right, because they're not trained in the use of firearms and when to use/ not use them.

They would have never gotten stranded. watch the episode again :)

Never heard of trigger happy soldiers ?

Kaiphantom
April 10th, 2010, 03:21 PM
Ummm, not really. When did Young ever say "shut up and die if you disagree with me"? As far as I know, Wray is "in the loop" as far as overseeing the crew goes. Wasn't she given everyone's personnel files to see where they'd fit in best?

Dr. Rush. Left on a planet quite recently. Any other points you'd like to try making?

Wray may be in a bit of a loop, but she has no authority; that's the whole point behind this mutiny. The military was in charge, when it should be the civilians.

Naonak
April 10th, 2010, 03:25 PM
If its on the destiny then the ship would already warn them that a ship is close by and they can get there guns.
What about cloaking devices?


If its on another planet then they'd obviously be given guns when they walk through the gate.
OK, that covers away teams, but what if hostile aliens manage to connect to the Destiny some other time?

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 03:26 PM
They would have never gotten stranded. watch the episode again :)

Never heard of trigger happy soldiers ?

Huh?! There are no DHD's. They had no other hand device for dialing the gate. Rush said the other planets that had been locked out were blocked likely because they were uninhabitable by the Ancients' standards. Meaning probable death if you stepped through the gate. Remember when Eli tried radioing the other two? Nothing.

jelgate
April 10th, 2010, 03:28 PM
Dr. Rush. Left on a planet quite recently. Any other points you'd like to try making?

Wray may be in a bit of a loop, but she has no authority; that's the whole point behind this mutiny. The military was in charge, when it should be the civilians.

Sure Young stranded Rush not because Young disagreed with him but because the guy framed him for murder

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 03:30 PM
Dr. Rush. Left on a planet quite recently. Any other points you'd like to try making?

Ooh, feeling smug? I still don't think Young went to that planet with marooning Rush in mind. I think he lost his temper after Rush got cocky. He clearly felt remorse for it, and he clearly hasn't wanted to start any muckraking by telling the crew what Rush did to him.


Wray may be in a bit of a loop, but she has no authority; that's the whole point behind this mutiny. The military was in charge, when it should be the civilians.

Why doesn't she have authority? Because the people in charge on Earth put Young in command, not Wray. She isn't even fit to lead. She's a junior IOA human resources generalist.

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 03:36 PM
Huh?! There are no DHD's. They had no other hand device for dialing the gate. Rush said the other planets that had been locked out were blocked likely because they were uninhabitable by the Ancients' standards. Meaning probable death if you stepped through the gate. Remember when Eli tried radioing the other two? Nothing.

Why would the destiny only have one hand dialing device ? Im pretty sure they have many like kinos and they could always send someone through the gate with the dialing device.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 03:38 PM
Why would the destiny only have one hand dialing device ? Im pretty sure they have many like kinos and they could always send someone through the gate with the dialing device.

They have more ON DESTINY, sure. There was only one with the team though. If Franklin had gone through the gate with Curtis and Palmer, not only would he be missing and presumed dead like them, but the people on the desert planet would have no way of contacting Destiny.

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 03:42 PM
They have more ON DESTINY, sure. There was only one with the team though. If Franklin had gone through the gate with Curtis and Palmer, not only would he be missing and presumed dead like them, but the people on the desert planet would have no way of contacting Destiny.

But wouldn't destiny contact them before the clock runs out and send the dialing device through ?

Kaiphantom
April 10th, 2010, 03:44 PM
Ooh, feeling smug? I still don't think Young went to that planet with marooning Rush in mind. I think he lost his temper after Rush got cocky. He clearly felt remorse for it, and he clearly hasn't wanted to start any muckraking by telling the crew what Rush did to him.

It's a perfect example; Young, as a military dictator, does what he wants and gets away with it. If he was really feeling remorse, he would have stepped down. But he didn't, did he?


Why doesn't she have authority? Because the people in charge on Earth put Young in command, not Wray. She isn't even fit to lead. She's a junior IOA human resources generalist.

You'd have to ask them that. It's quite clear she doesn't have much, if any. Like the rest of the civilians, she serves as Young's pleasure.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 03:51 PM
But wouldn't destiny contact them before the clock runs out and send the dialing device through ?

How would they know that the dialing device was lost? No one expected those three to bugger off because they felt like it!

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 03:54 PM
It's a perfect example; Young, as a military dictator, does what he wants and gets away with it. If he was really feeling remorse, he would have stepped down. But he didn't, did he?



You'd have to ask them that. It's quite clear she doesn't have much, if any. Like the rest of the civilians, she serves as Young's pleasure.

We're just restating our opinions at this point. I think it's safe to say we can agree to disagree and get on with our lives :)

Now, of only certain characters could do the same... ;)

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 03:55 PM
How would they know that the dialing device was lost? No one expected those three to bugger off because they felt like it!

They had orders to keep regular tabs and if there's no contact for some time then they would dial the gate and contact the team on radio.

Kaiphantom
April 10th, 2010, 03:56 PM
We're just restating our opinions at this point. I think it's safe to say we can agree to disagree and get on with our lives :)

Now, of only certain characters could do the same... ;)

True, but the fact remains that civilian authority is better. We'll see if the Destiny crew learns this eventually.

jelgate
April 10th, 2010, 03:57 PM
True, but the fact remains that civilian authority is better. We'll see if the Destiny crew learns this eventually.

Sounds more like an opinion to me;)

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 03:58 PM
Sounds more like an opinion to me;)

Me too...

Kaiphantom
April 10th, 2010, 03:59 PM
Sounds more like an opinion to me;)

An opinion backed up with the weight of history behind it... while contrary opinions still have no evidence. =)

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 04:00 PM
They had orders to keep regular tabs and if there's no contact for some time then they would dial the gate and contact the team on radio.

Ok, so what then? Greer just decided to shoot him? I still think it was for the best of everyone involved. I'd rather be shot in the arm than dead or stranded, wouldn't you?

jelgate
April 10th, 2010, 04:01 PM
An opinion backed up with the weight of history behind it... while contrary opinions still have no evidence. =)

Not really. I have yet to find any of your examples indicative where any kind of dictarship is accpeatable. Be they military or civilian

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 04:03 PM
An opinion backed up with the weight of history behind it... while contrary opinions still have no evidence. =)

Sigh... I don't disagree with you on this necessarily. I just don't think there are any civilians aboard Destiny who are up to the job. When Wray was in charge, she cut down the security detail on an offworld mission and generally didn't treat the military personnel all that great. Because they're soldiers does that mean they have less rights than the scientists?

Kaiphantom
April 10th, 2010, 04:03 PM
Not really. I have yet to find any of your examples indicative where any kind of dictarship is accpeatable. Be they military or civilian

Because you keep trying to bring up that strawman. Nowhere did I ever talk about a civilian dictatorship as a viable option. Please stop bringing this up, because while it's fun to smack down an argument I'm not making, you're really not helping your point.

What I have said, and please pay attention this time, is: the best and most free governments in this world have the military under civilian authority. Not dictatorship of ANY kind.

Edit:

Sigh... I don't disagree with you on this necessarily. I just don't think there are any civilians aboard Destiny who are up to the job. When Wray was in charge, she cut down the security detail on an offworld mission and generally didn't treat the military personnel all that great. Because they're soldiers does that mean they have less rights than the scientists?

There's a bit thing you get with civilian authority, that you don't get with military: elections. Regardless of who you think its better, there's a very good reason why military is under the control of civilians, and it's not just elections.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 04:05 PM
Because you keep trying to bring up that strawman. Nowhere did I ever talk about a civilian dictatorship as a viable option. Please stop bringing this up, because while it's fun to smack down an argument I'm not making, you're really not helping your point.

What I have said, and please pay attention this time, is: the best and most free governments in this world have the military under civilian authority. Not dictatorship of ANY kind.

Whose authority and to what extent does that authority go though? Rush and Wray didn't seem to be putting things to vote in a committee. Likely it would be Wray in charge with Rush allowed to do as he pleases.

jelgate
April 10th, 2010, 04:08 PM
Because you keep trying to bring up that strawman. Nowhere did I ever talk about a civilian dictatorship as a viable option. Please stop bringing this up, because while it's fun to smack down an argument I'm not making, you're really not helping your point.

What I have said, and please pay attention this time, is: the best and most free governments in this world have the military under civilian authority. Not dictatorship of ANY kind.


I'll say what I want. If you don't like it the ignore or report button are right.

With such a small group a military under civiliab authority would cause frictiion. In most societies the civilians greatly outnumber the military. Its pretty even if not more military on the Desting. The best kind of government would be some of kind joint cooperation. Don't ask me how it should be organized because I don't know

Nemises
April 10th, 2010, 04:10 PM
The best kind of government would be some of kind joint cooperation.

This.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 04:19 PM
This.

Agreed 100% if they can get it to work. Unfortunately, the military personnel generally don't understand civilians and vice versa it seems.

The Shrike
April 10th, 2010, 04:28 PM
....The HUGE problem here is that the civilians did a Coup D'Etat. Civilian Command is possible and probably would work better in the long run but that has to be established and developed, a constitution with rules and laws and a president is necessary. And you DO NOT get to that level by force....]

American Revolutionary War - April 19, 1775 – September 3, 1783

United Sates Constitution - Created September 17, 1787, Ratified June 21, 1788

Notice which came first.

Kaiphantom
April 10th, 2010, 04:29 PM
Whose authority and to what extent does that authority go though? Rush and Wray didn't seem to be putting things to vote in a committee. Likely it would be Wray in charge with Rush allowed to do as he pleases.

TJ kinda said: Majority vote. Which means Elections. Probably not in an official capacity, but in such a way that everyone feels their voice is being heard. That everyone has rights and responsibilities, and is being fairly treated. None of which you get in a military dictatorship, by the way. But you can say this, from your comfy chair, in your warm house, in front of a computer that is all made possible by a civilian government that controls the military.

If you wish to back up your argument, then please tell us what military dictatorship you'd like to live under. I'll give you your choice of the ones currently in progress around the world:

Burma
Fiji
Guinea
Libya
North Korea

Go ahead, make your pick. I suggest the last one, although the majority of people don't have internet access. Or electricity for that matter. The military dictatorship government has plenty of both, though!

{mod snip}

Jper
April 10th, 2010, 04:37 PM
I really don't get where this idea comes from that the people working on Icarus were under military command. Have we seen any evidence at all that it wasn't a scientific project with military protection and support? Like Atlantis? Where has it ever been said that the military were in charge before the evacuation?

Young was Icarus Base commander. Telford was supposed to lead the away team through the gate to Destiny. Rush is leading scientist on the ninth-chevron project and was supposed to be lead scientist on the away-team as well, but Telford had him removed at little while before the events of Air, pt.1. Wray was the human resources consultant. I don't think anyone of these four was actually in charge of one of the other, and that makes it a difficult situation. :) There was conflict even before they got to Destiny, where it only escalated. Solution seems simple to me, though.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 04:40 PM
TJ kinda said: Majority vote. Which means Elections. Probably not in an official capacity, but in such a way that everyone feels their voice is being heard. That everyone has rights and responsibilities, and is being fairly treated. None of which you get in a military dictatorship, by the way. But you can say this, from your comfy chair, in your warm house, in front of a computer that is all made possible by a civilian government that controls the military.

If you wish to back up your argument, then please tell us what military dictatorship you'd like to live under. I'll give you your choice of the ones currently in progress around the world:

Burma
Fiji
Guinea
Libya
North Korea

Go ahead, make your pick. I suggest the last one, although the majority of people don't have internet access. Or electricity for that matter. The military dictatorship government has plenty of both, though!

Ummm... first off, when did I ever say I wanted to live under a military dictatorship? Secondly, when did I say that Destiny should live under one? I can see Wray being a dictator just as much as Young is. Is it better just because she's not military? I don't see how it would be. Those are my opinions though, and I have a right to them. Just as you do to yours. I was trying to drop this debate as it's evident that neither of us will come to see the other's point but then you kept debating.

I'd also like to ask where you're typing from if it's not a comfy chair at a computer desk like I am. You're being rather scathing and rude, all the while completely missing or twisting my point of view to paint me as some kind of war-mongering idiot.


Duly noted. You are unable to debate your points in a valid manner, and do not care to back them up with any kind of evidence. I will recognize that in the future, that you are not interested in a constructive conversation. Have a good day.

Your biggest "evidence" to date was the statement about majority rules made by TJ, who wasn't even a member of the coup. When she said that, did anyone say "YES! That's right! Elections!"? If they did, I will certainly apologize.

Kaiphantom
April 10th, 2010, 04:46 PM
Ummm... first off, when did I ever say I wanted to live under a military dictatorship? Secondly, when did I say that Destiny should live under one? I can see Wray being a dictator just as much as Young is. Is it better just because she's not military? I don't see how it would be. Those are my opinions though, and I have a right to them. Just as you do to yours. I was trying to drop this debate as it's evident that neither of us will come to see the other's point but then you kept debating.

I'd also like to ask where you're typing from if it's not a comfy chair at a computer desk like I am. You're being rather scathing and rude, all the while completely missing or twisting my point of view to paint me as some kind of war-mongering idiot.

Because you seem to think a military dictatorship is better than having the civilians in charge. I thought if you felt that way, you'd rather move to a country that had one. I think it's apparent now that you believe military dictatorships are a bad idea.


Your biggest "evidence" to date was the statement about majority rules made by TJ, who wasn't even a member of the coup. When she said that, did anyone say "YES! That's right! Elections!"? If they did, I will certainly apologize.

First off, that comment was mainly to jelgate, because we talked a bit about this in another thread. Secondly, if you want more evidence for why civilian leadership is better, my evidence is all of history itself. Military dictatorships have consistently been bad for the people they ruled over. Whereas in modern day, all the advanced first world countries have civilian authority controlling the military. Seems to work out a lot better than places like North Korea, but that's just my own opinion.

The Shrike
April 10th, 2010, 04:54 PM
...The best kind of government would be some of kind joint cooperation. Don't ask me how it should be organized because I don't knowWell, the military probably won't accept a resolution that doesn't put one of theirs in charge, so how about this for a compromise. Put the three highest ranking officers (Young, Scott, Johansen) on a ballot, then let the civilians vote on which one they want in charge. Problem solved.

jelgate
April 10th, 2010, 05:00 PM
Well, the military probably won't accept a resolution that doesn't put one of theirs in charge, so how about this for a compromise. Put the three highest ranking officers (Young, Scott, Johansen) on a ballot, then let the civilians vote on which one they want in charge. Problem solved.

That doesn't sound like an idea will appease both sides. The civilians will still they are being oppresed and the military may get paranoid about why someone was choosen

Jper
April 10th, 2010, 05:03 PM
That doesn't sound like an idea will appease both sides. The civilians will still they are being oppresed and the military may get paranoid about why someone was choosen

Not to mention if Young doesn't voluntarily keeps to honor to himself and resigns his position, TJ or Scott will never be actually or comfortably in charge. That wouldn't work either.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 05:34 PM
Because you seem to think a military dictatorship is better than having the civilians in charge. I thought if you felt that way, you'd rather move to a country that had one. I think it's apparent now that you believe military dictatorships are a bad idea.

I always did think military dictatorships were bad. I wasn't arguing FOR one, I was arguing against a civilian one. I could easily see Wray trying to wrest total control, despite whatever rhetoric she uses to motivate the others. In my mind, the only way forward would be a dual leadership scenario. This may not work, but I think it's worth a try. I also think the military has more to offer than expertise in combat matters alone, but that may be for another thread.


First off, that comment was mainly to jelgate, because we talked a bit about this in another thread. Secondly, if you want more evidence for why civilian leadership is better, my evidence is all of history itself. Military dictatorships have consistently been bad for the people they ruled over. Whereas in modern day, all the advanced first world countries have civilian authority controlling the military. Seems to work out a lot better than places like North Korea, but that's just my own opinion.

The civilian authority in all these countries are politicians though, and they're backed by a cabinet of ministers with expertise in various areas. Sadly, I don't think the talent pool on Destiny is large enough to have a proper government. Not to mention, Wray isn't really a politician; she's a paper-pusher.

Kaiphantom
April 10th, 2010, 06:07 PM
I always did think military dictatorships were bad. I wasn't arguing FOR one, I was arguing against a civilian one. I could easily see Wray trying to wrest total control, despite whatever rhetoric she uses to motivate the others. In my mind, the only way forward would be a dual leadership scenario. This may not work, but I think it's worth a try. I also think the military has more to offer than expertise in combat matters alone, but that may be for another thread.

The civilian authority in all these countries are politicians though, and they're backed by a cabinet of ministers with expertise in various areas. Sadly, I don't think the talent pool on Destiny is large enough to have a proper government. Not to mention, Wray isn't really a politician; she's a paper-pusher.

All politicians are paper pushers. The main point as to why civilian is better, is because the military can be on the same "board" and involved in the same decisions. People need to feel they have a say in how they are ruled, or they will keep revolting. Which means Destiny will never have peace as long as Young has all the power and the military calls the shots. In a country like the US, we assent to being ruled, because we believe we have a say, and the government is acting in our best interest. If it is perceived as no longer being so to enough people, the people will remove their assent and revolt. Which is what the crew did, and will do again and again. It's not over, because the military are acting like a donkey's backside.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 06:11 PM
All politicians are paper pushers. The main point as to why civilian is better, is because the military can be on the same "board" and involved in the same decisions. People need to feel they have a say in how they are ruled, or they will keep revolting. Which means Destiny will never have peace as long as Young has all the power and the military calls the shots. In a country like the US, we assent to being ruled, because we believe we have a say, and the government is acting in our best interest. If it is perceived as no longer being so to enough people, the people will remove their assent and revolt. Which is what the crew did, and will do again and again. It's not over, because the military are acting like a donkey's backside.

I think Young's attention has been grabbed now. Remember, he wanted to talk to Wray about how to go forward. She was the one who was non-committal

The Shrike
April 10th, 2010, 06:12 PM
That doesn't sound like an idea will appease both sides....Maybe not, but it would appease me, since my girl would win. :D

Kaiphantom
April 10th, 2010, 06:22 PM
I think Young's attention has been grabbed now. Remember, he wanted to talk to Wray about how to go forward. She was the one who was non-committal

We shall see. It's sad that it took a revolt for that to happen. If he is to grow as a character, he has to sede power now. The next few episodes will tell.

Lord Hurin
April 10th, 2010, 06:29 PM
We shall see. It's sad that it took a revolt for that to happen. If he is to grow as a character, he has to sede power now. The next few episodes will tell.

Well... when did they try talking to him? Did anyone come to him with concerns of "dude, I don't think you're listening to us civvies"? I can't recall.

Having said that, when Wray was in charge she was on the brink of being disrespectful to the military. Not letting them protect the away team, especially targeting Greer with her contempt. I think if we replace a military leader who doesn't consider the civilians' well-being and strengths with a civilian leader who doesn't consider the soldiers' well-being and strengths then we've gotten nowhere.

skarwolf
April 10th, 2010, 06:49 PM
I got this idea watching The Nature of Things with David Suzuki tonight. It was about the arms race in space. They showed scientists and military people speaking about the subject. Most of the time the scientists weren't told what they were doing was eventually going to be used as a weapon. For example they were told the high powered lazer was going to be used to track satellites. The lady questioned why does it require such a narrow beam, if you want to detect and track wouldn't a wide beam perform better ?

This lead me to look at Rush in that tone. Rush wants to play with the toys (Destiny) without having the military snooping around trying to weaponize everything. Thats about it.

Phenom
April 11th, 2010, 05:58 AM
I found myself siding instantly with the military in this ep (which I thought was brilliant). I was slightly annoyed with the scene with TJ ordering the grunt to lower his gun, when they had the obvious tactical advantage which would have ended the coup in 3 seconds.

It is interesting to note those who believe the civilian leadership would work best, and have noted real life examples to substantiate their argument. That may be the case, but would you want Politicians leading your troops on the front line? Making the decisions that would affect the group in ways that essentially only army personnel would have experience with? Certainly if the crew were on the Destiny for 20 years and the imminent threat of death had passed, then a more regular form of government/slash leadership method would be quite beneficial, but in these stages the civillians wouldn't know their rear end from their front in these sort of situations.

jelgate
April 11th, 2010, 07:49 AM
I found myself siding instantly with the military in this ep (which I thought was brilliant). I was slightly annoyed with the scene with TJ ordering the grunt to lower his gun, when they had the obvious tactical advantage which would have ended the coup in 3 seconds.

It is interesting to note those who believe the civilian leadership would work best, and have noted real life examples to substantiate their argument. That may be the case, but would you want Politicians leading your troops on the front line? Making the decisions that would affect the group in ways that essentially only army personnel would have experience with? Certainly if the crew were on the Destiny for 20 years and the imminent threat of death had passed, then a more regular form of government/slash leadership method would be quite beneficial, but in these stages the civillians wouldn't know their rear end from their front in these sort of situations.

Thier is no way they could overpower the civilians with two soldiers and one 9mm.

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 11th, 2010, 07:53 AM
Thier is no way they could overpower the civilians with two soldiers and one 9mm.

Indeed. They could have shot Wray, but that would have most likely enraged the rest of the civilians, and it's a little hard to take on 60+ people with one pistol with a less than full mag.

Jper
April 11th, 2010, 07:55 AM
And TJ ordered him to put the gun down. :) TJ is still TJ, and it's not in her nature to go around shooting her own people.

jelgate
April 11th, 2010, 07:56 AM
Indeed. They could have shot Wray, but that would have most likely enraged the rest of the civilians, and it's a little hard to take on 60+ people with one pistol with a less than full mag.
Was it 60+? I always thought the military and civilians were pretty equal

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 11th, 2010, 07:57 AM
Was it 60+? I always thought the military and civilians were pretty equal

I thought it was around 60 civs, and 20+ military. Anyone got any solid figures?

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 11th, 2010, 08:00 AM
And TJ ordered him to put the gun down. :) TJ is still TJ, and it's not in her nature to go around shooting her own people.

Even, it must be noted, Young, he with the great temper, managed to resist shooting Rush. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the mutiny, one has to admit the military were very restrained in how they handled it. Problem is of course as Greer said it isn't over, and knowing Young, he won't do anything to relive the pressure, next time will be more bloody.

Jper
April 11th, 2010, 08:09 AM
I thought it was around 60 civs, and 20+ military. Anyone got any solid figures?

Seeing as there are 23 weapons, including handguns that'd be about right. :) 2/6 is about the correct division we've seen. However, only 40-50 out of the 80 people on board have a name and have been seen on screen, so it's hard to say conclusively.

jelgate
April 11th, 2010, 08:33 AM
Seeing as there are 23 weapons, including handguns that'd be about right. :) 2/6 is about the correct division we've seen. However, only 40-50 out of the 80 people on board have a name and have been seen on screen, so it's hard to say conclusively.

Thats assuming every soilder left with a weapon when they evacuated Icarus. TJ for example had no gun in Air.

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 11th, 2010, 08:51 AM
Thats assuming every soilder left with a weapon when they evacuated Icarus. TJ for example had no gun in Air.

Some people will have had two weapons, Young for example carried both his UMP and a sidearm in the pilot.

jelgate
April 11th, 2010, 08:55 AM
Some people will have had two weapons, Young for example carried both his UMP and a sidearm in the pilot.
So we're back to having no clue of the military:civilian ratio?

FallenAngelII
April 11th, 2010, 09:25 AM
It's not just the military as an entity, it's the military that's on the ship. Everyone knows that Greer is a loose cannon that would punch anyone out for accidentally stepping on his toes or something as long as he'd get away with it. Now everyone also knows that Young tried to murder Rush. As such, they deemed the Commander in Chief (Young) and his trusted lieutenants (among others, Greer), unfit to run the ship, especially in a dictatorial way.

You see the way Young reacted today. He wanted to re-route power to the weapons against Rush's suggestion because, well, Young knows everything. It was only after Eli said that Rush was right that Young conceded. Had Eli not been present, Young would've doomed the ship merely because he thinks he's always right.

It's not anti-military bias. It's anti-dictatorship and anti-Young bias.

Jper
April 11th, 2010, 09:34 AM
So we're back to having no clue of the military:civilian ratio?

Well, what do you suggest then? The weapons seems at least some indication, no?

The big problem is that we haven't got a fixed list of characters for all 88 or so people that came on board Destiny. And TPTB will never give us such a list.

Jper
April 11th, 2010, 09:38 AM
For all the named people on board of Destiny, see this thread:
http://forum.gateworld.net/threads/70887-List-of-Named-People-Who-Evacuated-to-Destiny

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 11th, 2010, 09:40 AM
It's not just the military as an entity, it's the military that's on the ship. Everyone knows that Greer is a loose cannon that would punch anyone out for accidentally stepping on his toes or something as long as he'd get away with it.

Really, this would be the person who walked into the mess hall with an unchambered weapon, if he was such a loose cannon why didn't he wander in with a weapon cocked, ready and safety off rather than waiting to cock the weapon only when the civilians wouldn't get down.

jelgate
April 11th, 2010, 09:40 AM
Well, what do you suggest then? The weapons seems at least some indication, no?

The big problem is that we haven't got a fixed list of characters for all 88 or so people that came on board Destiny. And TPTB will never give us such a list.
No because we have no clue if all military carried a weapon or if as MP6 some carried two. I'm perfectly with us concluding we have no idea how many are civilians and how many are military

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 11th, 2010, 09:42 AM
No because we have no clue if all military carried a weapon or if as MP6 some carried two. I'm perfectly with us concluding we have no idea how many are civilians and how many are military

There are judging by the group shots though a lot less military than civilians. It makes sense as well, very few military personnel were inside Icarus base for the evac, most were outside fighting the Lucian Alliance.

FallenAngelII
April 11th, 2010, 09:45 AM
Really, this would be the person who walked into the mess hall with an unchambered weapon, if he was such a loose cannon why didn't he wander in with a weapon cocked, ready and safety off rather than waiting to cock the weapon only when the civilians wouldn't get down.
He assaulted Telford, he threatened to shoot Rush (and aimed a gun at him), he practically threatened Wray. The reason why he hasn't actually hurt anyone on the ship yet is probably because he knows he won't get away with it. If he punches out a civilian for no good reason, it will start an uproar and the civilians will take over, this time by force. And even if that doesn't happen, Young will have no way to protect him, he'll get locked up for good this time.

Who knows why he had the safety on. Maybe because he knew that if he accidentally killed/shot someone due to overreaction, he was dead meat.

You cannot deny that he has anger management problems.

jelgate
April 11th, 2010, 09:45 AM
There are judging by the group shots though a lot less military than civilians. It makes sense as well, very few military personnel were inside Icarus base for the evac, most were outside fighting the Lucian Alliance.

Their is only so much space to be occupied when defending Icarus base. So while true it still requires us really to have some kind of estimate for Icarus personel

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 11th, 2010, 09:50 AM
He assaulted Telford, he threatened to shoot Rush (and aimed a gun at him), he practically threatened Wray. The reason why he hasn't actually hurt anyone on the ship yet is probably because he knows he won't get away with it. If he punches out a civilian for no good reason, it will start an uproar and the civilians will take over, this time by force. And even if that doesn't happen, Young will have no way to protect him, he'll get locked up for good this time.

You cannot deny that he has anger management problems.
I can very much deny he has anger management problems. We have no idea about the details surrounding him hitting Telford, Rush attacked him first in the Desert and he in no way assaulted or was near assaulting Wray. As for him not getting away with shooting people, they had the civilians surrounded by military personnel with automatic weapons, what would the civilians have done if Greer had shot Volker, used harsh words?

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 11th, 2010, 09:52 AM
Their is only so much space to be occupied when defending Icarus base. So while true it still requires us really to have some kind of estimate for Icarus personel

Which of course we don't have.:S At this point though I think it is safe to say that Civilans outnumber the military, but by what exact number we don't know.

asdf1239
April 11th, 2010, 09:57 AM
and he will cede it to...the LUCIAN ALLIANCE!

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 11th, 2010, 09:58 AM
and he will cede it to...the LUCIAN ALLIANCE!

You really like them, don't you? ;)

FallenAngelII
April 11th, 2010, 10:10 AM
...Rush attacked him first in the Desert...
Maybe I'm going senile, but I quite distinctly remember all Rush doing was trying to get to the water after Greer had refused to let him have some water in the middle of a desert. The denial of water alone was inhumane. The near-assault and threat on his life was a crime.


...and he in no way assaulted or was near assaulting Wray.
I'm sorry, English is only my third language, but I'm pretty certain I said "threatened", not "assaulted".


As for him not getting away with shooting people, they had the civilians surrounded by military personnel with automatic weapons, what would the civilians have done if Greer had shot Volker, used harsh words?
The better question is: What would Young have done?

Also, the civilians would be in an uproar and the war would be on.

xxxevilgrinxxx
April 11th, 2010, 10:17 AM
Hey all, it seems to me that a majority of people on here believe that the civilians are in the right and the military personnel aboard Destiny are a bunch of thugs.

Well, I find Wray's point about every military in the civilized world falling under civilian government authority to be very true. Obviously she was saying this so she could get power, but why were the other civilians following her and Rush so easily?

I was thinking specifically of Volker and Brody. Have they had a bad go of it on Destiny? Oh, probably, but how is that thew fault of the military personnel? I know a lot of civilians were pissed about having their quarters searched for missing supplies and again for the gun that killed Spencer. Why though? It doesn't make sense to me why they'd be so resentful over it. The soldiers' quarters were being checked as well, so why the big fuss?

Does this all relate to Young leaving Rush on that planet? Obviously for Rush it did, but who else knew?

there's a lot of posts on the topic, too many to read through in one sitting, so I'll start with the first post :)

I tend to think that there will always be tension between civilian and military rule. As to the extent of that military rule and painting the soldiers as a bunch of thugs? For me, that goes too far and has the feel of something oft repeated and not so deeply thought out, like the whole soap opera meme. The level of resentment is likely tied to fear and a lack of control over their own...yeah, destiny :)

The Mighty 6 platoon
April 11th, 2010, 10:54 AM
Maybe I'm going senile, but I quite distinctly remember all Rush doing was trying to get to the water after Greer had refused to let him have some water in the middle of a desert. The denial of water alone was inhumane. The near-assault and threat on his life was a crime.

Hmm I seem to remember Rush voluntarily giving up his water, and then whinging when he suddenly found himself thirsty.

I'm sorry, English is only my third language, but I'm pretty certain I said "threatened", not "assaulted".
Well I didn't see Greer threaten Wray in any way either, being cross because you think a superior has made a bad a bias decision and telling them this does not equate with threatening them.

The better question is: What would Young have done?

Also, the civilians would be in an uproar and the war would be on
War would be on? Automatic weapons versus soft fleshy bodies tend to have one result. If Greer wanted to he could have shot Volker, he didn't and his weapon wasn't even ready to fire when he walked into the mess.

xxxevilgrinxxx
April 11th, 2010, 11:28 AM
wow, this is a fascinating, and fast moving, conversation!


...
Someone mentioned that they had history with a dictatorship, as do I (i am Cuban) but you have to remember a Civilian Coup D'Etat is a dictatorship as well you would just be handing the guns to someone else.

Tamara gets it perfectly when she says that as soon as they took the ship by force they declared war.
...
yes, this exactly. Which is why I think you have Eli saying "Irony" when he comes through the door to the civilian side and has someone pointing a gun at him. A civilian dicatorship is no better. In fact, it's likely worse, as they are not accustomed to wielding force and being under orders, so you're more likely to have people shooting people and doing some very dangerous, ill thought out things, where military is at least accustomed to think along the lines of force and what to do in those types of situations.


I admire the fact that you stated that without going into an anti-Greer "what a ruthless barbarian" tirade as many other posters seem to love doing. Greer applies force where ordered to or where he sees fit. He applies only enough force to get the job done (which includes none if he can make his point through vague threat of force) and no more than that. Just as a US Marine is trained to do. Cheers, have some green :)

....Greer is a solid and loyal soldier but he's an example of the saying, when all you've got is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail. This is the one thing that he does, and he does it well. It does tend to make the rest of his make up look a little rough but if you had to rely on him, I think he'd go to the death for you if it came to that


A government with 80 people? That would get silly fast. Not to mention within any democracy their is still a dictatorial element, presidents and prime ministers of democracies are empowered to make snap decisions in emergency situations without consultation. Whoever you stick in charge of the Destiny is going to have to make snap decisions and will not be able to form committees to make every decision.
all government is dictatorship, essentially, for this one reason. Decisions have to be made and not everyone is going to like them. Even in a democracy, decisions can be made that piss off a large group of people; all you have to do is turn on the news to see that. So even if they vote on the Destiny and 20 people don't like it? Yes, it would get silly, fast. I think that Young is going for something more along the lines of military rule - lite.


I don't see how a dictatorship under civilians is any better. In fact its quite the same
hence Eli's "Irony"


Let's use an example here, if we replace Destiny with a base in Afghanistan and 60 or so civilian contractors have to take shelter there, does the base suddenly fall under civilian control? No it remains under military command. Civilian leader with regards to the military make policy, but the military makes the orders to carry out said policy.that's a fantastic example. As Jelgate has said, a change of scenery doesn't change the chain of command


Haven't you heard?! Military personnel are inherently untrustworthy, violent, arrogant and unfit to command. :rolleyes: and so are civilians, humans period


At that moment? No, because such a situation is clearly a military emergency situation.the whole situation they've found themselves in is one big ass emergency


Doesn't seem very practical. If the ship's boarded or something, a significant area of the ship could be taken and people killed by the time they get the weapons out.which is why in our current society, we train people to be armed on a regular basis, making sure that they have rules in place to only use those weapons under certain circumstances. I'd rather see the military with the weapons than the civilians. I'd never want to see NO ONE with weapons, not in that situation


Ummm, not really. When did Young ever say "shut up and die if you disagree with me"? As far as I know, Wray is "in the loop" as far as overseeing the crew goes. Wasn't she given everyone's personnel files to see where they'd fit in best?that's never happened, although Young had the ability to have that sort of rule from minute one if he wished it


Sure Young stranded Rush not because Young disagreed with him but because the guy framed him for murderyes, this, and also because Rush was a danger to everyone else on board the ship

phew, now to try to read the rest of the posts!

FallenAngelII
April 11th, 2010, 01:08 PM
Hmm I seem to remember Rush voluntarily giving up his water, and then whinging when he suddenly found himself thirsty.
Yes, he selflessly gave his water to Young and Scott so they could go on. And then after hours of walking back towards the gate, he was thirsty. And Greer inhumanely denied him water.

Also, did you just argue that if someone whines about being thirsty, you can threaten to shoot them? Because it certainly sounds like it. Instead of conceding the point, you changed it to "Well, Rush whined!".


Well I didn't see Greer threaten Wray in any way either, being cross because you think a superior has made a bad a bias decision and telling them this does not equate with threatening them.
He went there to confront her... in her living quarters... and then stood there and looked down at her, bearing down his height at her. It was not an overt threat.


War would be on? Automatic weapons versus soft fleshy bodies tend to have one result.
If they kill off all of the civilians, they'll have no one to run the ship for them and they would die. Thus, they cannot do that. The civilians would rebel, refusing to aid the military. They would strike or sabotage the systems. Trust me, the civilians are more numerous and well-equiped for survival than the military. The military needs the civilians.


If Greer wanted to he could have shot Volker, he didn't and his weapon wasn't even ready to fire when he walked into the mess.
And this makes him not a loose cannon? Gee, what a great guy. He didn't just shoot that other unarmed guy. Clearly he has no anger management issues!

Oh hey, I forgot one thing: Greer agrees with Young that if someone annoys you enough, you can kill them. Not in a Young-way where Young apparently felt bad about it. Greer pretty much said straight out: I think it's fine that you tried to kill Rush. I see absolutely nothing wrong with it!

Which means that if Greer could get away with it, he'd kill anyone who annoyed him enough. What a great guy! Would you want him watching your kids?


I don't see how a dictatorship under civilians is any better. In fact its quite the same
It's not a dictatorship if there are co-rulers. Especially if those co-rulers are democratically elected. The civilians would elect Wray, Rush and maybe even Young to co-rule if Young just let them vote on it. Wray would oversee anything civilian-based, Rush would oversee anything science-based and Young could focus on what he does best: anything military-based.

But, hey, we can't have that! Let's not have several people in command in order to alleviate the burden because Young wants to play King!

Lord Hurin
April 11th, 2010, 02:58 PM
Yes, he selflessly gave his water to Young and Scott so they could go on. And then after hours of walking back towards the gate, he was thirsty. And Greer inhumanely denied him water.

Also, did you just argue that if someone whines about being thirsty, you can threaten to shoot them? Because it certainly sounds like it. Instead of conceding the point, you changed it to "Well, Rush whined!".


He went there to confront her... in her living quarters... and then stood there and looked down at her, bearing down his height at her. It was not an overt threat.


If they kill off all of the civilians, they'll have no one to run the ship for them and they would die. Thus, they cannot do that. The civilians would rebel, refusing to aid the military. They would strike or sabotage the systems. Trust me, the civilians are more numerous and well-equiped for survival than the military. The military needs the civilians.


And this makes him not a loose cannon? Gee, what a great guy. He didn't just shoot that other unarmed guy. Clearly he has no anger management issues!

Oh hey, I forgot one thing: Greer agrees with Young that if someone annoys you enough, you can kill them. Not in a Young-way where Young apparently felt bad about it. Greer pretty much said straight out: I think it's fine that you tried to kill Rush. I see absolutely nothing wrong with it!

Which means that if Greer could get away with it, he'd kill anyone who annoyed him enough. What a great guy! Would you want him watching your kids?


It's not a dictatorship if there are co-rulers. Especially if those co-rulers are democratically elected. The civilians would elect Wray, Rush and maybe even Young to co-rule if Young just let them vote on it. Wray would oversee anything civilian-based, Rush would oversee anything science-based and Young could focus on what he does best: anything military-based.

But, hey, we can't have that! Let's not have several people in command in order to alleviate the burden because Young wants to play King!

Is there even really a point in debating with you? You're so anti- Young/Greer/Military that nothing anyone ever said could change your mind. Come on, I'll await your response criticizing my lack of evidence, weak arguments, etc.

Jper
April 11th, 2010, 03:20 PM
Is there even really a point in debating with you? You're so anti- Young/Greer/Military that nothing anyone ever said could change your mind. Come on, I'll await your response criticizing my lack of evidence, weak arguments, etc.

Hurin, relax. You're taking this too hard. Don't take it upon you to change someone's mind. :) That's not the point. :) Just debate, form your opinions, and decide for yourself. You don't have to make everyone agree with you. :) Some will agree with you on some things others won't, that's just live. :) If you don't want to go into it anymore, leave it just at that and ignore it. :) It's much better for your sanity and calm. This is just supposed to be friendly advice 'cause I like you. You seem smart, don't let this get the better of you. :) Okay?

garhkal
April 11th, 2010, 03:28 PM
Still when civilians agree to work for the military thry agree to follow thier rules.
Actually the president said so.

Daniel was a civ and it was mentioned several times he does NOT HAVE to follow thier orders.


Where would they go on patrols ?

If its on the destiny then the ship would already warn them that a ship is close by and they can get there guns.

If its on another planet then they'd obviously be given guns when they walk through the gate

As a member of the mil let me chime in here. EVERY base i have been on, only those on active security patrols or watch had their weapons. ALL other weapons were locked up in the (or one of the many) armories.


You cannot deny that he has anger management problems.

That is very true. Heck i might almost go so far to say he might be a little crazy..

Lord Hurin
April 11th, 2010, 03:29 PM
Hurin, relax. You're taking this too hard. Don't take it upon you to change someone's mind. :) That's not the point. :) Just debate, form your opinions, and decide for yourself. You don't have to make everyone agree with you. :) Some will agree with you on some things others won't, that's just live. :) If you don't want to go into it anymore, leave it just at that and ignore it. :) It's much better for your sanity and calm. This is just supposed to be friendly advice 'cause I like you. You seem smart, don't let this get the better of you. :) Okay?

Heh, thanks. Rough day, sorry all :)

xxxevilgrinxxx
April 11th, 2010, 03:31 PM
Heh, thanks. Rough day, sorry all :)

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d23/XXXevilgrinXXX/bearhug.gif
completely random cyber hug :)

AtlantisRules!!!
April 11th, 2010, 03:35 PM
Civilians were completely right in every way. :P does that answer the question? :P

jelgate
April 11th, 2010, 03:39 PM
Civilians were completely right in every way. :P does that answer the question? :P

Yep because withholding food and water was right in every way:rolleyes:

Jper
April 11th, 2010, 03:46 PM
Yep because withholding food and water was right in every way:rolleyes:

Don't take the troll bait, jel... ;) :p

FallenAngelII
April 11th, 2010, 11:18 PM
Is there even really a point in debating with you? You're so anti- Young/Greer/Military that nothing anyone ever said could change your mind. Come on, I'll await your response criticizing my lack of evidence, weak arguments, etc.
Nice rebuttal to completely valid and well-thought out points. I'm not anti-military, I'm critical of Young's and Greer's actions in the past (and present as it is). Greer is not a lovey dovey guy. I'm not saying he's a bad person who needs to die or something. I'm merely pointing out that no matter how delusional people want to be, Greer has shown himself to have anger management issues.

By the way, I don't get how people can delude themselves into thinking I'm anti-military. I'm actually one of the few people on either side advocating a compromise. The command of Destiny should be split up by committee. Rush, Wray and Young (and many more people) should all share the power. Rush will get the science department, Young the military and Wray everything else (i.e. the "civilian-non-scientific" part).

Wow, how very un-military of me!


Yep because withholding food and water was right in every way:rolleyes:
Their methods were questionable, but so the judgment of the people who are currently running the ship by force.

Lord Hurin
April 12th, 2010, 08:43 AM
Nice rebuttal to completely valid and well-thought out points. I'm not anti-military, I'm critical of Young's and Greer's actions in the past (and present as it is). Greer is not a lovey dovey guy. I'm not saying he's a bad person who needs to die or something. I'm merely pointing out that no matter how delusional people want to be, Greer has shown himself to have anger management issues.

By the way, I don't get how people can delude themselves into thinking I'm anti-military. I'm actually one of the few people on either side advocating a compromise. The command of Destiny should be split up by committee. Rush, Wray and Young (and many more people) should all share the power. Rush will get the science department, Young the military and Wray everything else (i.e. the "civilian-non-scientific" part).

Wow, how very un-military of me!


Their methods were questionable, but so the judgment of the people who are currently running the ship by force.

I acknowledged that it had been a bad day and I wasn't in my best frame of mind. I also apologized. You can take it or leave it.

carmencatalina
April 12th, 2010, 09:25 AM
I acknowledged that it had been a bad day and I wasn't in my best frame of mind. I also apologized.

Good on you - these topics have a way of getting us all wound up (which shows they are interesting).

Lahela
April 12th, 2010, 10:41 AM
Good on you - these topics have a way of getting us all wound up (which shows they are interesting).

Indeed. Divided has been... divisive :p But it's all good. :)

arrakis44
April 14th, 2010, 10:27 AM
While watching the episode I got the feeling that there was more of a military bias than a civilian one. The whole episode seemed to be set up to paint the civilians as the villains and the military folks as the heroes, who have to overcome the challenges put into place by the 'evil' scientist. Not saying I personally agree with that perspective, it's just the impression I got after watching.

beafly
April 14th, 2010, 10:58 AM
No your wrong here as they are all effectively senior civil service (ie not local government) employees they do have a structure and it maps directly onto military rank as well.

Young is an O6 which is a GS15 which I suspect that some of the senior scientists would be on as the lead on Atlantis I could see Rodney being on this giving him parity with Sam – Weir was probably an even higher grade.

GS rating doesn't grant authority over military personnel. IF the scientists were gov't employees, and not contractors, they would have their own chain of command. It might offer them nicer accommodations at the BOQ, and a modicum of respect, but not equivalent rank.

Also, the 14-15 rating is normally a management level. When scientists get these ratings it is because they need to be paid sufficiently for their level of education and experience, not because they actually command some authority. The authority part would be determined by their title and area of responsibility. GS-15 would be appropriate for Weir commanding a base.