PDA

View Full Version : How Did Scott Ever Pass Military Training?



Shai Hulud
June 5th, 2010, 05:22 AM
He's certainly not cut out for it is he?

wargrafix
June 5th, 2010, 05:30 AM
He passed through it, like everything else. In and out, in and out.



* get it? :-P

somme
June 5th, 2010, 05:33 AM
I don't think he's ever been in the position of having to kill one of his own before. Even if they thought he was a traitor.

pipi
June 5th, 2010, 05:42 AM
He passed officer training and he had no field experience prior to Icarus.

Shai Hulud
June 5th, 2010, 05:46 AM
Was good to see Young putting him firmly in his place at the start of the episode with his little line about following orders. Scott's not suited to command, on Earth he'd be the equivalent of Walter, desk jockey pushing paper and pens.

Shai Hulud
June 5th, 2010, 05:47 AM
He passed through it, like everything else. In and out, in and out.



* get it? :-P

Hahaha! Green for you! :)

Commander Zelix
June 5th, 2010, 05:48 AM
He passed through it, like everything else. In and out, in and out.



* get it? :-P
You certainly didn't need to add "get it?". Didn't you? :P

Stormtrooper
June 5th, 2010, 06:01 AM
He's certainly not cut out for off-world duty and neither is Young.

pipi
June 5th, 2010, 06:07 AM
Was good to see Young putting him firmly in his place at the start of the episode with his little line about following orders. Scott's not suited to command, on Earth he'd be the equivalent of Walter, desk jockey pushing paper and pens.

That's what happens with no field experience. Scott and Young have not developed a bond of loyalty unlike Greer and Young.

Shai Hulud
June 5th, 2010, 06:11 AM
You dont have to have a bond of loyalty to do your job. Scott's inexperience is compounded by his questionable morality and the fact that he is easily manipulated by others. Wray has him wrapped round her little finger, she flashes him a look and the next moment he's grappling with Greer attempting to open the door. Greer should have sparked him out.

Commander Zelix
June 5th, 2010, 06:23 AM
I like Greer's "stand to attention" cold stare in that scene vs "emotional" Scott. It was a nice contrast.

Takamuri
June 5th, 2010, 06:45 AM
As an officer it is your obligation to question the morality of orders coming from your superiors.

If you follow an order that leads to the murder of innocents for example, you can be held just as responsible as the commanding officer.

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 5th, 2010, 07:22 AM
As an officer it is your obligation to question the morality of orders coming from your superiors.

If you follow an order that leads to the murder of innocents for example, you can be held just as responsible as the commanding officer.

Well I was about to say the same thing. :D I've been quick on this forum to point out that military personnel may feel the need to resort to torture, and in my opinion it is sometimes necessary. But it is also necessary for officers to make sure they are happy with the orders they are following. It is absolutely the right thing for officers to question seniors over morally questionable acts, to not do so leads to a culture of blind obedience, but can lead to a litany of war crimes, and in the long run, people who follow blindly and have no initiative of their own are pretty useless to the military.

Aside from that it is Scott's duty not to follow and be complicit in illegal orders. Where interrogation ends and torture begins can be blurry, but it appeared for a minute that Young had killed Telford, something that there is no leeway in, it would be an illegal act under military law.

Scott did exactly what he should have done. Young failed to inform him what was going on, and appeared to be about to commit an illegal act, which Scott is duty bound to stop him. Scott's training seemed to be working perfectly.

Save Chloe
June 5th, 2010, 07:46 AM
Greer never questions what Col. Young does, because he knows his place. Scott was sounding like a little wimp. "Waahh, you're gonna kill him, waaaaah". Shut up and be a soldier Scott!

suse
June 5th, 2010, 07:48 AM
I don't think he's ever been in the position of having to kill one of his own before. Even if they thought he was a traitor.

Very true. He's inexperienced.

Which isn't a problem. Depends if he's learning or not.

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 5th, 2010, 07:51 AM
Greer never questions what Col. Young does, because he knows his place. Scott was sounding like a little wimp. "Waahh, you're gonna kill him, waaaaah". Shut up and be a soldier Scott!

Err, it's Scott's job to question his superior if he thinks he's about to commit illegal actions. It's his duty to stop him. Please actually know something about the military before jumping to conclusions.

Lahela
June 5th, 2010, 07:57 AM
This argument always reminds me of SGA's "Instinct".


DEX: Aren't we supposed to follow his orders?

TEYLA: Sometimes, we are allowed to make exceptions.

DEX: And who decides when it's one of those times?

TEYLA: We do.

It seems to sum up the way things work in practice pretty well. I take it to mean that if the orders are inappropriate for a developing situation and the officer in charge can't or won't change them, then those who serve under that officer have some leeway.

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 5th, 2010, 08:01 AM
This argument always reminds me of SGA's "Instinct".



It seems to sum up the way things work in practice pretty well. I take it to mean that if the orders are inappropriate for a developing situation and the officer in charge can't or won't change them, then those who serve under that officer have some leeway.

All orders are subject to change on the ground. If you've just had an order to charge an enemy position passed down from HQ, but you've just discovered an enemy machine gun nest in the way, then no one will raise an eyebrow if those orders are disregarded.

If an order is downright illegal, then not only to those receiving it have the duty not to obey, but if at all possible prevent the execution of that order and report it.

Lahela
June 5th, 2010, 08:12 AM
All orders are subject to change on the ground. If you've just had an order to charge an enemy position passed down from HQ, but you've just discovered an enemy machine gun nest in the way, then no one will raise an eyebrow if those orders are disregarded.

If an order is downright illegal, then not only to those receiving it have the duty not to obey, but if at all possible prevent the execution of that order
and report it.

That's what I thought, but my military training has consisted entirely of a lot of TV, so I just wanted to check. :)

jelgate
June 5th, 2010, 08:13 AM
Those female instructors can be easily convinced:P

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 5th, 2010, 08:18 AM
That's what I thought, but my military training has consisted entirely of a lot of TV, so I just wanted to check. :)

Clearly you've been watching the more realistic shows then. :D

Coronach
June 5th, 2010, 08:26 AM
I love how the one person who is extremely familiar with military matters in this thread is diametrically opposed to the view others are taking of "Scott needs to be a REAL soldier!!!11", yet those others are convinced they're right.

Not to pull a Godwin's law or anything, but if you're going to say that soldier's must ALWAYS obey their superior officers without question, then you cannot fault anyone in the Nazi regime for what they did save for the superior officers that gave those orders. After all, they were just "being good soldiers", amirite?! :eek:

Sure, this example is very far removed in magnitude...but the underlying idea is the same. Also, thanks go out to The Mighty 6 platoon for his insight. I can't green you at the moment though. :(

Shai Hulud
June 5th, 2010, 08:33 AM
Thing is though, Scott's making a habit of questioning or ignoring Young's orders. Hardly the sort of actions which the Captain of Team Young should be displaying.

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 5th, 2010, 08:43 AM
I love how the one person who is extremely familiar with military matters in this thread is diametrically opposed to the view others are taking of "Scott needs to be a REAL soldier!!!11", yet those others are convinced they're right.

Not to pull a Godwin's law or anything, but if you're going to say that soldier's must ALWAYS obey their superior officers without question, then you cannot fault anyone in the Nazi regime for what they did save for the superior officers that gave those orders. After all, they were just "being good soldiers", amirite?! :eek:

Sure, this example is very far removed in magnitude...but the underlying idea is the same. Also, thanks go out to The Mighty 6 platoon for his insight. I can't green you at the moment though. :(

Steady now let's not make my head too big. :D

I'm not even the biggest expert on the forum, I'm part time, a member of the TA, come from a military family and have a lot of friends in the military. Compared to some of the military guys on the forum I'm a small fry.

Problem is their not online at the moment. :P

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 5th, 2010, 08:44 AM
Thing is though, Scott's making a habit of questioning or ignoring Young's orders. Hardly the sort of actions which the Captain of Team Young should be displaying.

And if his orders are illegal or even invalid then its his job to question those orders.

erotavlas
June 5th, 2010, 08:46 AM
He passed through it, like everything else. In and out, in and out.



* get it? :-P

i don't get it....sorry my simple mind can't handle certain things...:(

Shai Hulud
June 5th, 2010, 08:52 AM
And if his orders are illegal or even invalid then its his job to question those orders.

Fact that he listens to Wray rather than Young speaks volumes IMHO.

Shai Hulud
June 5th, 2010, 08:52 AM
i don't get it....sorry my simple mind can't handle certain things...:(

A pun on Scott's sexual proclivities?

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 5th, 2010, 08:54 AM
Fact that he listens to Wray rather than Young speaks volumes IMHO.

Not really. He listened to Wray in this case because Young was on the verge of committing a highly illegal act under military law. But when Wray tired her little coup Scott was with Young 100%. Pretty much says it all really.

Cory Holmes
June 5th, 2010, 09:12 AM
Steady now let's not make my head too big. :D
*shoots you in the head*
There, problem solved :D


Not really. He listened to Wray in this case because Young was on the verge of committing a highly illegal act under military law. But when Wray tired her little coup Scott was with Young 100%. Pretty much says it all really.
This is so true.

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 5th, 2010, 09:22 AM
*shoots you in the head*
There, problem solved :D

Gee, I feel so much better now. :D

xxxevilgrinxxx
June 5th, 2010, 10:31 AM
Scott was right to question Young, and further, to question any order. That being said, Scott is very green, and there's something soft in his character to the point that I think that Young is shielding him from hard decisions that he doesn't want to see Scott's hands dirtied with. It's a failure on both parts and perhaps Scott may never be suited to make what some would call the hard decisions but a part of that is that Young perhaps needs to stop trying to keep Scott's hands clean.

Joachim
June 5th, 2010, 11:06 AM
Fact that he listens to Wray rather than Young speaks volumes IMHO.
He's not "listening" to Wray instead of Young. He agreed with Wray in that instance and told her.

The fact of the matter is, and I stated this before, Scott is exceptional the way he is. Young is a faltering commander at best, it is absolutely necessary for Scott to question his orders - and as The Mighty 6 Platoon pointed out, it isn't "un-soldier" to question a superiors orders on occasion.


questionable morality
You're joking, right? He has sex - so what? He's still more moral than most of the other people on the ship.

Alien encounter
June 5th, 2010, 11:22 AM
scott passed , may be cause the training session did not include executing prisoners cold headed.

also, questioning the situation is supposed to be part of good judgment skills, following blindly colonel's questionable acts does not make sense. who could say ..... may be colonel was an LA agent or a goauld trying to wipe out the traces by killing telford?

besides he has taken oath to serve the nation, not colonel young.

Blackhole
June 5th, 2010, 11:23 AM
Scott was right to question Young, and further, to question any order. That being said, Scott is very green, and there's something soft in his character to the point that I think that Young is shielding him from hard decisions that he doesn't want to see Scott's hands dirtied with. It's a failure on both parts and perhaps Scott may never be suited to make what some would call the hard decisions but a part of that is that Young perhaps needs to stop trying to keep Scott's hands clean.

I agree that his is very green but I disagree that there is anything soft in his character. All I have seen is he is very compassionate and tries to do the right thing. Scott certainly has a right to be clued in to Young’s rational for Telford's treatment? There has already been a mutiny on the ship once already and one can't fault Scott for trying to prevent the apparent murder of two people.

That being said there is something to the importance of keeping both Scott and Wray in the dark to preserve the theater of the threat that Young was presenting to Telford. Young probably knew this and did what was necessary. Afterward, I think it would have been good to have explained this to Scott.

xxxevilgrinxxx
June 5th, 2010, 11:32 AM
I agree that his is very green but I disagree that there is anything soft in his character. All I have seen is he is very compassionate and tries to do the right thing. Young should have clued Scott into his rational for Telford's treatment? There has already been a mutiny on the ship once already and one can't fault Scott for trying to prevent the apparent murder of two people.

That being said there is something to the importance of keeping both Scott and Wray in the dark to preserve the theater of the threat that Young was presenting to Telford.

You're correct, in that I should have chosen my words more carefully, 'soft' meaning something a little different to me. On a compassionate scale, I do tend to see him as being considerably more compassionate than Young. Not that Young is incapable, but that Scott hasn't had enough experiences to temper his compassion. I still tend to think that Young tends to shield Scott from these kinds of decisions. Who knows, maybe Young regrets having to make these decisions himself, but in any case, I saw it as a problem. Scott disobeying an order I get; he's done so since the pilot episode, but the distrust, if that's what it is? Who knows, we may see this come out in later episodes and I'm willing to give it the time it needs to develop.

Blackhole
June 5th, 2010, 11:41 AM
You're correct, in that I should have chosen my words more carefully, 'soft' meaning something a little different to me. On a compassionate scale, I do tend to see him as being considerably more compassionate than Young. Not that Young is incapable, but that Scott hasn't had enough experiences to temper his compassion. I still tend to think that Young tends to shield Scott from these kinds of decisions. Who knows, maybe Young regrets having to make these decisions himself, but in any case, I saw it as a problem. Scott disobeying an order I get; he's done so since the pilot episode, but the distrust, if that's what it is? Who knows, we may see this come out in later episodes and I'm willing to give it the time it needs to develop.

If you mean you think Young regards Scott in a fatherly and protective way then I agree with you.

I think a big part of the problem he has had with the civilians has been his style of command; he can be dismissive and cold which doesn't inspire obedience but threatens it.

xxxevilgrinxxx
June 5th, 2010, 11:46 AM
If you mean you think Young regards Scott in a fatherly and protective way then I agree with you. I think a big part of the problem Young has is his style of command; he can be dismissive and cold which doesn't inspire obedience but threatens it.

yes, I do think he sees Scott in that way, which may be getting in the way of what he needs to be actually teaching Scott. I'm only half agreeing on dismissive and cold, because while I think he's shown that he is perfectly capable of being that way, he's also shown that he's not only that. It's both. He both inspires obedience and threatens it. It just happens to matter where you are on that scale :)

erotavlas
June 5th, 2010, 12:42 PM
A pun on Scott's sexual proclivities?

no wonder I didn't get it....:o

pipi
June 5th, 2010, 05:12 PM
Greer never questions what Col. Young does, because he knows his place. Scott was sounding like a little wimp. "Waahh, you're gonna kill him, waaaaah". Shut up and be a soldier Scott!

There's a difference between a soldier and an officer. Scott is an officer albeit lower ranked than Young. As stated by others, in some situations on morals and ethics there is leeway to question a command. In an unrelated example, if you deem your superior as mentally unfit for duty you maybe entitled to relieve him or her of command and take control of the troops. I wonder if this topic is covered in officer training.

Shai Hulud
June 5th, 2010, 05:17 PM
The fact that Scott is in the line of duty on Destiny when he should be pushing a pen somewhere and banging his secretary in the stationary cupboard is indicative of the 'Wrong people' situation. Scott needs to shape up and take some lessons from Greer. Greer knows best.

Avenger
June 5th, 2010, 06:18 PM
No, Greer doesn't always know best. No one knows best all the time. In this instances, Scott was 100% correct to be questioning Young. Scott did not know what Young was doing and, as far as he knew, Young was killing Telford for no reason. Allowing it would have made Scott just as culpable as Young because he allowed it to happen. It is his duty to question and not follow illegal orders. He perceived, correctly based on his knowledge of the situation, that Young was doing something illegal.

Scott said that if he knew Telford was brainwashed and that killing him and bringing him back would break the brainwashing, he would have supported Young from the start.

Shai Hulud
June 5th, 2010, 06:20 PM
If you disagree with Greer knowing best you've not been 3 rounds with Greer. Greer always knows best after 3 rounds.

meo3000
June 5th, 2010, 07:09 PM
At this point, if i were Young, i would exchange Scott for TJ. Not considering the fact that shes pregnant with his child, at least as a soldier, she follows orders and knows to keep her personal opinions to herself, and shut it.

Let Scott spend the afternoon with Kiva, maybe then he'll respect his superiors. You didnt see him pull that crap when O'Neill was on board, did you?

EllieVee
June 5th, 2010, 07:10 PM
If Young was pulled up on committing an illegal act then Greer, blindly following, would have been for the high jump as well. Scott was right to question Young but the whole thing could have been avoided had Young said what he intended.

Major_Griff
June 5th, 2010, 07:16 PM
If Young was pulled up on committing an illegal act then Greer, blindly following, would have been for the high jump as well. Scott was right to question Young but the whole thing could have been avoided had Young said what he intended.

Yeah but then we wouldn't have gotten that crazy cliff hanger and two weeks of raging debate on whether or not torture is okay. ;)

meo3000
June 5th, 2010, 07:26 PM
Since when a superior officers has to explain their decisions to those under their command?

Never, thats when. Doesnt matter if you agree our not, you obey your orders. If not, 2 weeks in the brig for insubordination or resign and be a civilian.

How Scott became an officer is beyond me.

Major_Griff
June 5th, 2010, 07:31 PM
Since when a superior officers has to explain their decisions to those under their command?

Never, thats when. Doesnt matter if you agree our not, you obey your orders. If not, 2 weeks in the brig for insubordination or resign and be a civilian.

How Scott became an officer is beyond me.

I gotta agree with the others. If Scott thought Young was taking illegal action it was his duty to try and stop him. Clearly Scott thought Young was either torturing or killing Telford, either action would have been illegal. On the other hand I do agree that Young shouldn't have to stop and explain all of his actions to his underlings, but Young hasn't done a great job of building trust with them to the point where they can believe beyond doubt that Young is doing the right thing.

marty2006
June 5th, 2010, 07:38 PM
Scotts beginning to piss me off big time. Not quite as much as that Wray but he is on his way.

GateroomGuard
June 5th, 2010, 08:00 PM
I think Young is upset with Scott because he won't take a stand. Either shut up and follow Youngs orders no questions asked. Or stand up to Young and either relieve him or arrest him. But don't whine to him once it's over.

meo3000
June 5th, 2010, 08:12 PM
If Scott thought Young was taking illegal action it was his duty to try and stop him.

True, another proof Scott is a bad officer. There are regulations in place to give him the authority to relieve Young of his post. But being the officer with no spine that he is, he chickens out and let it go. Which is a good thing cause he clearly doesnt have a clue what it takes to be an officer in the first place.

SBN
June 5th, 2010, 09:48 PM
Since when a superior officers has to explain their decisions to those under their command?

Never, thats when. Doesnt matter if you agree our not, you obey your orders. If not, 2 weeks in the brig for insubordination or resign and be a civilian.

How Scott became an officer is beyond me.

Uggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

Sometimes reading forums can just be mind numbingly frustrating. You people simply are not listening. How quaint it is to sit in an armchair judging having ZERO experience with the subject at hand. The Mighty 6 platoon, who I believe has served (in Afghanistan no less?) has explained everything you need to know, end of subject.

So, I will scream it as loud as I can; It is the DUTY for an officer to question illegal and immoral orders! Got that? It is their job, it is what officers HAVE BEEN trained to do. Anyone remember that little scuffle oh about 60 years ago, otherwise known as WWII? Anyone remember that little line of defense "I was just following orders" was kind of thrown out? Most countries, including every NATO country is a signatory to numerous international conventions and treaties that govern the "rules" or laws of nations.

It should also be pointed out that no soldier can, or has to my knowledge, been brought up on charges for disobeying illegal or immoral orders. In fact commendations have been awarded to soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq who did exactly that, they stepped up and prevented criminal behavior on the part of senior officers.

wargrafix
June 5th, 2010, 10:02 PM
Since when a superior officers has to explain their decisions to those under their command?

Never, thats when. Doesnt matter if you agree our not, you obey your orders. If not, 2 weeks in the brig for insubordination or resign and be a civilian.

How Scott became an officer is beyond me.

Like the what was done in Abu Graib prison, eh? If an illegal act is being comitted, it is the duty of an officer to question and put a stop to the act. If you are ordered by a superior officer to rape a woman, would you do it?

I think the military portrayed in the series shows how deeply flawed the entire command is. Some interest stuff in the series.

Lt. Jeffer
June 5th, 2010, 10:12 PM
he didnt had an military training he found his dog tag in his cornflakes :D

kwlafayette
June 5th, 2010, 10:16 PM
Err, it's Scott's job to question his superior if he thinks he's about to commit illegal actions. It's his duty to stop him. Please actually know something about the military before jumping to conclusions.

Yeah, know something about the military. Like if you think your superior is giving an illegal order, you relieve him of command. You don't put on a training bra and whine like a 12 year old girl, while actually taking no action. Take your own advice.

kwlafayette
June 5th, 2010, 10:30 PM
It is pretty clear that Young is not fit for command, and neither is Scott. Who does that leave, James as the ranking officer? Young failed to defend the ship in any effective way; not because he lacked the means, but because he lacked the intelligence and or resolve. Scott has not yet relieved him, despite abundant evidence that Young will get them all killed eventually. Greer should have been dishonorably discharged years ago for his rage and discipline problems. It seems like the more time they put into developing a character, the less sense that character makes.

It appears that roid rager who offed himself early was actually thinking the most clearly of any of the military personnel aboard.

kwlafayette
June 5th, 2010, 10:34 PM
And how in the heck did the LA manage to engineer Destiny lock breaking devices that worked perfectly, without access to any Destiny locks for testing? They just somehow managed to do it using the verbal description of one guy who had been on the ship via the stones a couple of times? The more I analyze this episode, the less sense it makes. It is clearly the weakest episode so far.

It seems pretty clear that next episode, they are going to have to reveal that the Lucian Alliance has access to Destiny information that did not come from Telford, or anyone else on board. They are about to tell us that the Lucian Alliance has discovered something somewhere, that is not in the Atlantis database, or the Asgard core, or anything else that the earthlings have ever found.

PS. If freaking Anubis is back, that will be a season one shark jumping record.

Avenger
June 5th, 2010, 11:11 PM
Yeah, know something about the military. Like if you think your superior is giving an illegal order, you relieve him of command. You don't put on a training bra and whine like a 12 year old girl, while actually taking no action. Take your own advice.

Scott did try, but Greer stopped him.

GateroomGuard
June 5th, 2010, 11:16 PM
Scott did try, but Greer stopped him.

And Scott should have put Greer in his place. If Scott really wanted to stop Young he would have ordered Greer to help him relieve or arrest Young. If Greer refused his radios James or TJ and gets them to bring a squad of marines to arrest them both. Scott is the second highest ranking officer on Destiny, he needs to start acting like it.

kwlafayette
June 5th, 2010, 11:40 PM
Scott did try, but Greer stopped him.

No he did not try, he did nothing. There would be a formal process, something laid out in the USAF operations manual. Scott would say something like "under the authority of regulation X subsection Y, as the ranking junior officer, I hereby relieve you of command for incompetence/illegal activity/whatever reason". THAT is relieving someone of command. Anything that is not that, is not relieving someone of command, it is inaction at best.

If there is not such a regulation, say the USAF does not allow the removal of a superior officer, then the proper course of action, if you really believe an order to be illegal, is to draw your weapon, and demand that your superior desist. And if your superior did not desist, would it not become your duty to either execute him on the spot, or take him into custody?

PG15
June 6th, 2010, 12:10 AM
True, another proof Scott is a bad officer. There are regulations in place to give him the authority to relieve Young of his post. But being the officer with no spine that he is, he chickens out and let it go. Which is a good thing cause he clearly doesnt have a clue what it takes to be an officer in the first place.

Wait, so you begrudge Scott for questioning Young's orders AND for not relieving him on account of those questionable orders? Either he obeys the orders absolutely, or he relieves the one giving said orders? Those are the only options open to him? Really?

Man, your military is pretty messed up. So as a subordinate, if I think a superior officer is doing something illegal, I can just relieve him of command and he can't do anything about it? Seems to me that that way lies madness.


And how in the heck did the LA manage to engineer Destiny lock breaking devices that worked perfectly, without access to any Destiny locks for testing? They just somehow managed to do it using the verbal description of one guy who had been on the ship via the stones a couple of times?

Why not? There appears to be enough information flowing back and forth between Homeworld Command and Destiny for the former to develop a plan to try to dial the gate while Destiny was in a star, so clearly some technical info is being transfered.

EllieVee
June 6th, 2010, 12:28 AM
Since when a superior officers has to explain their decisions to those under their command?

Never, thats when. Doesnt matter if you agree our not, you obey your orders. If not, 2 weeks in the brig for insubordination or resign and be a civilian.

How Scott became an officer is beyond me.

Since the decision that certain orders were illegal.

Tuvok
June 6th, 2010, 02:39 AM
Thing is though, Scott's making a habit of questioning or ignoring Young's orders. Hardly the sort of actions which the Captain of Team Young should be displaying.

You know, I would be entirely ready to back Scott on being the voice of reason. On being the voice of better Angels. That was untill Faith, when he ditched his post to protect less then ten civies on the Planet. That was strike two, strike three was instead of manning up about it was to whine to his superiour office that they should have staayyeed because they were meaannntt toooo...

Thanks writers, with one episode to me you turned Scott into a guy who ditches his post and complains to his superiour officer that they should have stayed on a planet ''because they were meant too.''

Nice going.

meo3000
June 6th, 2010, 03:55 AM
Scott is a 1st Lt with little to no experience in the Stargate program, questioning orders from a Colonel, thats FOUR ranks above him!!!

I would understand your point if he was a major or a Lt Col. Scott voiced his concerned when the interrogation began, good for him, duly noted, now shut it and follow your orders. IF Young wants to revisits said concerns, he will do so at a time of his choosing, preferably after the crisis has been resolved, and in private.

Do you see Greer constantly questioning Scotts orders? No, why? Cause he knows his place and he knows Scott probably knows better anyway, why? Cause Scott is its superior officer and he respect and understand the chain of command.

Whats the point of ranks if youre gonna question every orders. Cause thats what Scott has been doing.

Lahela
June 6th, 2010, 05:02 AM
Some folks seem determined not to read this post back on page 1, written by a member of the military...


I've been quick on this forum to point out that military personnel may feel the need to resort to torture, and in my opinion it is sometimes necessary. But it is also necessary for officers to make sure they are happy with the orders they are following. It is absolutely the right thing for officers to question seniors over morally questionable acts, to not do so leads to a culture of blind obedience, but can lead to a litany of war crimes, and in the long run, people who follow blindly and have no initiative of their own are pretty useless to the military.

Aside from that it is Scott's duty not to follow and be complicit in illegal orders. Where interrogation ends and torture begins can be blurry, but it appeared for a minute that Young had killed Telford, something that there is no leeway in, it would be an illegal act under military law.

Scott did exactly what he should have done. Young failed to inform him what was going on, and appeared to be about to commit an illegal act, which Scott is duty bound to stop him. Scott's training seemed to be working perfectly.

Coronach
June 6th, 2010, 06:48 AM
Scott is a 1st Lt with little to no experience in the Stargate program, questioning orders from a Colonel, thats FOUR ranks above him!!!

This means nothing aboard Destiny where Scott was given 2nd-in-command status by Young when they arrived. Not only that, but he and TJ are the only 1st lieutenants on board, and every military officer is a lower rank than them. If Scott doesn't question said orders, who do you propose should? :S


Do you see Greer constantly questioning Scotts orders? No, why? Cause he knows his place and he knows Scott probably knows better anyway, why? Cause Scott is its superior officer and he respect and understand the chain of command.

What has Scott ever done that could be considered "illegal" and thus warrant Greer questioning him?

As per a lot of your other points, see Lahela's post above mine.

EllieVee
June 6th, 2010, 06:59 AM
This means nothing aboard Destiny where Scott was given 2nd-in-command status by Young when they arrived. Not only that, but he and TJ are the only 1st lieutenants on board, and every military officer is a lower rank than them. If Scott doesn't question said orders, who do you propose should? :S

Look where that sort of thing got Rush: bashed, left to die, abducted and tortured by aliens. Scott's got off lightly.

meo3000
June 6th, 2010, 07:04 AM
Instead of relieving Young and assuming command, he ran to mommy to tell what daddy did and ultimately did nothing. Training did not work IMO!

Those were exceptional circumstance and exceptional measures were needed to ensure the safety of everyone onboard. Like Young said, those who made the rules didn't foresaw such circumstances.


But it is also necessary for officers to make sure they are happy with the orders they are following.
Thats bullcrap, maybe with everyday base life but in a combat situation it doesnt make sense at all. If you receive an order to hold a key position but it will put a lot of your men at risk, you wont be happy about it but you'll understand it needs to be done, and you will follow orders. If you dont you risk everyone lives.


he and TJ are the only 1st lieutenants on board, and every military officer is a lower rank than them. If Scott doesn't question said orders, who do you propose should?

Well i havent see TJ behave like Scott, have you? I wonder why? If anyone is in a position to butt head with Young about his decisions, its her. Carrying his offspring kinda put her in a special position, dont you think? Must be the hormones (sarcasme).

EllieVee
June 6th, 2010, 07:10 AM
Instead of relieving Young and assuming command, he ran to mommy to tell what daddy did and ultimately did nothing. Training did not work IMO!

Um, what are you on about? Are you talking about Scott telling Wray? Dude, she was already there.


Those were exceptional circumstance and exceptional measures were needed to ensure the safety of everyone onboard. Like Young said, those who made the rules didn't foresaw such circumstances.

And Young could have avoided half that angst by consulting the key people in his ever increasing poor command. It's yet another stupid decision by an incompetent commander. It's a wonder most of them aren't dead.

meo3000
June 6th, 2010, 07:18 AM
I give up. Let Wray run the ship into the ground, or a blackhole. Whatever.

xxxevilgrinxxx
June 6th, 2010, 07:38 AM
Scott is a 1st Lt with little to no experience in the Stargate program, questioning orders from a Colonel, thats FOUR ranks above him!!!

I would understand your point if he was a major or a Lt Col. Scott voiced his concerned when the interrogation began, good for him, duly noted, now shut it and follow your orders. IF Young wants to revisits said concerns, he will do so at a time of his choosing, preferably after the crisis has been resolved, and in private.

Do you see Greer constantly questioning Scotts orders? No, why? Cause he knows his place and he knows Scott probably knows better anyway, why? Cause Scott is its superior officer and he respect and understand the chain of command.

Whats the point of ranks if youre gonna question every orders. Cause thats what Scott has been doing.First off, I completely agree that a soldier, any soldier, has the duty to question illegal orders. But I also happen to agree with your point about experience, as in, Scott having little to none. I'll have to look through transcipts but did Scott ever ask what Young was doing or did he just assume Young was killing him? Maybe that doesn't matter. In any case, given Scott's expression when Young revived Telford, I'm betting he wished he asked and wished he trusted.


You know, I would be entirely ready to back Scott on being the voice of reason. On being the voice of better Angels. That was untill Faith, when he ditched his post to protect less then ten civies on the Planet. That was strike two, strike three was instead of manning up about it was to whine to his superiour office that they should have staayyeed because they were meaannntt toooo...

Thanks writers, with one episode to me you turned Scott into a guy who ditches his post and complains to his superiour officer that they should have stayed on a planet ''because they were meant too.''

Nice going.It's from this sort of thing that I'm of the belief that Scott might be too soft for what he's doing.


Instead of relieving Young and assuming command, he ran to mommy to tell what daddy did and ultimately did nothing. Training did not work IMO!

Those were exceptional circumstance and exceptional measures were needed to ensure the safety of everyone onboard. Like Young said, those who made the rules didn't foresaw such circumstances.


Thats bullcrap, maybe with everyday base life but in a combat situation it doesnt make sense at all. If you receive an order to hold a key position but it will put a lot of your men at risk, you wont be happy about it but you'll understand it needs to be done, and you will follow orders. If you dont you risk everyone lives.



Well i havent see TJ behave like Scott, have you? I wonder why? If anyone is in a position to butt head with Young about his decisions, its her. Carrying his offspring kinda put her in a special position, dont you think? Must be the hormones (sarcasme).I agree that in a combat situation there are going to be orders you don't want to follow. I also think that Young's got better things to do with his time than hold Scott's hand through every decision. Fallout from this should be interesting.

brian_177
June 6th, 2010, 08:09 AM
I'm with Scott on this one. It wasn't a lawful order, so he's under no obligation to follow it. I'm kinda getting tired of Young ruling by iron fist and only caring about military protocol when it suits him.

The only thing gained by not telling everyone watching exactly why he was letting Telford suffocate was to provide suspense for the audience, and by doing so alienate those crew members in the show. Had Young told Scott what the plan was, I guarantee you he would have backed his play 100%. Heck, even Wray might have seen the sense in it.

jelgate
June 6th, 2010, 08:43 AM
I'm with Scott on this one. It wasn't a lawful order, so he's under no obligation to follow it. I'm kinda getting tired of Young ruling by iron fist and only caring about military protocol when it suits him.

The only thing gained by not telling everyone watching exactly why he was letting Telford suffocate was to provide suspense for the audience, and by doing so alienate those crew members in the show. Had Young told Scott what the plan was, I guarantee you he would have backed his play 100%. Heck, even Wray might have seen the sense in it.

Was it? O'Neill seemed to have given Young clearence to do it in Suberversion

Arjannl
June 6th, 2010, 09:03 AM
Was it? O'Neill seemed to have given Young clearance to do it in Suberversion

It may even be from the president or Emperor of the Known Universe. If an order is illegal, and you decide as officer to follow it, you are accountable for it's repercussions in court.

Alexandria7
June 6th, 2010, 09:06 AM
Okay, I asked my father who's a Commander in the US Navy. He offered this insight...

If the prisoner is a Prisoner of War, then they are protected by the Geneva Convention. The Geneva Conventions have been ratified in the US, specifically the torture part. Lieutenant Scott would have a moral obligation to report it for it's illegal.

If the prisoner is more like a detainee...then things are different.

A detainee is someone whom the CIA designates as promoting terrorism. They are not currently covered under the Geneva Conventions, however, there are several arguments going on right now in court over this very thing.

If the person is a detainee, then torture is allowed if authorized by the CIA.

(I've not see the show so we'll assume that the person is a detainee.)

If they are a detainee, then Scott has absolutely no right to question the orders of a Colonel or a General. No officer would be stupid enough to do so, and none would have become an officer with that kind of attitude. He is sworn to uphold the orders of those above him.

kwlafayette
June 6th, 2010, 09:11 AM
Instead of relieving Young and assuming command, he ran to mommy to tell what daddy did and ultimately did nothing. Training did not work IMO!

Those were exceptional circumstance and exceptional measures were needed to ensure the safety of everyone onboard. Like Young said, those who made the rules didn't foresaw such circumstances.


Thats bullcrap, maybe with everyday base life but in a combat situation it doesnt make sense at all. If you receive an order to hold a key position but it will put a lot of your men at risk, you wont be happy about it but you'll understand it needs to be done, and you will follow orders. If you dont you risk everyone lives.



Well i havent see TJ behave like Scott, have you? I wonder why? If anyone is in a position to butt head with Young about his decisions, its her. Carrying his offspring kinda put her in a special position, dont you think? Must be the hormones (sarcasme).

This is absolutely key. A lot of people don't realize what the most important thing is in the military. It is not the guns, or the high tech bombs; it is the discipline. Without discipline, all other advantages are moot. Discipline is the key element that allowed Mitchell Paige to hold that hill at Guadalcanal.

Lt. Jeffer
June 6th, 2010, 09:18 AM
Okay, I asked my father who's a Commander in the US Navy. He offered this insight...

If the prisoner is a Prisoner of War, then they are protected by the Geneva Convention. The Geneva Conventions have been ratified in the US, specifically the torture part. Lieutenant Scott would have a moral obligation to report it for it's illegal.

If the prisoner is more like a detainee...then things are different.

A detainee is someone whom the CIA designates as promoting terrorism. They are not currently covered under the Geneva Conventions, however, there are several arguments going on right now in court over this very thing.

If the person is a detainee, then torture is allowed if authorized by the CIA.

(I've not see the show so we'll assume that the person is a detainee.)

If they are a detainee, then Scott has absolutely no right to question the orders of a Colonel or a General. No officer would be stupid enough to do so, and none would have become an officer with that kind of attitude. He is sworn to uphold the orders of those above him.

But he also harmed Rush who is not an detainee

Major_Griff
June 6th, 2010, 09:25 AM
The point isn't whether or not the order was illegal, the point is that Young gave Scott no reason to think he was doing anything but torturing and/or murdering Telford. Clearly in hindsight, venting the atmo was to unwash Telford's brain similar to when they used the Rite of Mal Sharaan on Teal'c. Young shouldn't have to stop an explain his orders, but he needs to foster more trust among his underlings so they have no reason to think he is doing anything but the right thing.

Blackhole
June 6th, 2010, 10:41 AM
I think it was necessary to keep both Scott and Wray in the dark to preserve the theater of the threat that Young was presenting to Telford. If he had told them then Telford would likely have picked up on their lack of fear and it would have undermined what he was attempting. Young probably knew this and did what was necessary. Afterward, I think it would have been good to have explained this to Scott rather than chastising him. It is Scott's duty to do what he thinks is right and the simple fact remains is that Young has an anger problem and did marooned Rush on the planet. Ironically it is probably this fact that Telford was aware of that made Young's threat believable and so effective.

kymeric
June 6th, 2010, 10:46 AM
How many people do you know who are really cut out for their jobs? 1 maybe 2 out of hundreds? Work is work, he was 2nd IC on a base noone thought was gonna work. That like being mad the assistant manager at wendys cant win the Alamo. lulz

Sami_
June 6th, 2010, 11:24 AM
Can someone please tell me what the order was that Young gave Scott that he disobeyed?

He displayed that he was uncomfortable with the situation but I didn't see him refuse a direct order.

Zkyire
June 6th, 2010, 11:52 AM
Thing is though, Scott's making a habit of questioning or ignoring Young's orders. Hardly the sort of actions which the Captain of Team Young should be displaying.


To be fair, Young, when on Earth, is regularly talking with O'Neill (his superior officer) in O'Neill's office. Young makes a point and then walks away without being dismissed. Often.

In this instance, Scott had every right to question him. But to be fair to Young, he does give everyone a lot of leeway most of the time.

Zkyire
June 6th, 2010, 12:01 PM
Can someone please tell me what the order was that Young gave Scott that he disobeyed?

He displayed that he was uncomfortable with the situation but I didn't see him refuse a direct order.

Young was asking if Scott would only obey him if he were to tell Young every little detail of every plan.

SCOTT: What in the hell was that?

YOUNG: What in the hell was that, sir.

SCOTT: All you had to do was tell me!

YOUNG: I was keeping you out of it.

SCOTT: You didn't have to. If I had known that killing him and bringing him back was the only way to beat that brainwashing technology I would have been behind you 100%.

YOUNG: You'll follow orders so long as I explain everything to you beforehand?

SCOTT: No, sir.. that is not what I meant--

YOUNG: Good because if it was; we'd have a problem, lieutenant. Do we have a problem?

SCOTT: .. no sir.

YOUNG: Good, because now is not the time for that.

kymeric
June 6th, 2010, 12:43 PM
Young is kinda like Odin the all father by now, or hes developing into him...

Sorry too much Thor comic books ><

brian_177
June 6th, 2010, 02:07 PM
If the person is a detainee, then torture is allowed if authorized by the CIA.

(I've not see the show so we'll assume that the person is a detainee.)

If they are a detainee, then Scott has absolutely no right to question the orders of a Colonel or a General. No officer would be stupid enough to do so, and none would have become an officer with that kind of attitude. He is sworn to uphold the orders of those above him.

Torture is one thing. I was totes on board when they were just beating Telford up. Killing him is something completely different.

PG15
June 6th, 2010, 03:40 PM
Can someone please tell me what the order was that Young gave Scott that he disobeyed?

He displayed that he was uncomfortable with the situation but I didn't see him refuse a direct order.

That's a good question. The only order that Scott seems to have disobeyed was telling Wray everything when Young told him not to tell anyone about this.

But after scanning through the transcripts for "Subversion", I found no such order.


Look where that sort of thing got Rush: bashed, left to die, abducted and tortured by aliens. Scott's got off lightly.

Oh come on. You're really equating Scott's verbal questioning of Young's order with Rush's frame of Young for murder? Hey that rhymes.

wargrafix
June 6th, 2010, 04:21 PM
No officer has the right to order torture. It is the duty of another officer to put a stop to such actions.

Scott may be young, but still a bit more resolve than that weakling Young. Even Young knows what a waste he is.

brian_177
June 6th, 2010, 04:45 PM
That's a good question. The only order that Scott seems to have disobeyed was telling Wray everything when Young told him not to tell anyone about this.

I think people are interchanging the terms "disobeying an order" and "insubordination". Now, I think these are two separate offenses under military law, meaning the people saying he disobeyed an order are wrong, but they may very well be treated as the same crime.

xxxevilgrinxxx
June 6th, 2010, 04:49 PM
I think people are interchanging the terms "disobeying an order" and "insubordination". Now, I think these are two separate offenses under military law, meaning the people saying he disobeyed an order are wrong, but they may very well be treated as the same crime.

insubordination -I think that's more likely to fit Scott's actual actions

EllieVee
June 6th, 2010, 04:52 PM
But he also harmed Rush who is not an detainee

And the POW/detainee difference is simply weasel wording to allow a person to be held for an indefinite period without trial.


Oh come on. You're really equating Scott's verbal questioning of Young's order with Rush's frame of Young for murder? Hey that rhymes.

Oh, what Young has done to Rush is far worse but it's an evolution. Look at how he threatened Wray in Light.

brian_177
June 6th, 2010, 04:54 PM
I find myself getting tired of Young picking and choosing when to use military protocol. He had no issue knocking up an officer under his command. No issue punching out Telford. But oh gawd! Scott is arguing with me, slap him in irons!

Still, as Mommy always says, there's a time and place for everything--Scott should have been asking what he could do to prepare for an imminent attack, not complaining that he wasn't in the loop.


But he also harmed Rush who is not an detainee

That's comparing apples an oranges. Did he lose his temper with Rush? Yes. Would I kick someone's ass if they framed me for murder? Probably.

xxxevilgrinxxx
June 6th, 2010, 05:14 PM
I find myself getting tired of Young picking and choosing when to use military protocol. He had no issue knocking up an officer under his command. No issue punching out Telford. But oh gawd! Scott is arguing with me, slap him in irons!

Still, as Mommy always says, there's a time and place for everything--Scott should have been asking what he could do to prepare for an imminent attack, not complaining that he wasn't in the loop.



That's comparing apples an oranges. Did he lose his temper with Rush? Yes. Would I kick someone's ass if they framed me for murder? Probably.

when did Young slap Scott in irons again? :p
he gave him a bit of a chain yank, and reminded him of his place. That's not exactly the same thing :)

PG15
June 6th, 2010, 05:58 PM
Oh, what Young has done to Rush is far worse but it's an evolution. Look at how he threatened Wray in Light.

So the fact that Scott got off lightly means Young's evolving towards a better person then. :p

GateroomGuard
June 6th, 2010, 06:01 PM
So the fact that Scott got off lightly means Young's evolving towards a better person then. :p

If this was the same Young from Justice, Scott would be unconscious from a head butt in the gateroom as the Lucian Alliance come in.

pipi
June 6th, 2010, 06:38 PM
So far I've gathered that Young had every military right to behave as he did. He got permission from O'neall to perform the interragation and he did not need to inform his subordinates of his plans for exocising the brain washing.

But with all that said.

Young's handling of the situation did not foster any good relationships with his crew. He is just too self centered to realise that his 2IC is trained to question his morally questionable killing of another Colonel or person. And to add injury to insult, he back handed Scott's constructive criticism without thought of repercussions of his actions. It'd be in Young's best interest if after the Lucian Alliance incursion he had a fatherly-son talk with Scott to make him not feel so pitiful.

Young should have realise that he has a role in training Scott to becoming a better officer. And to build a stronger bond of loyalty with his 2IC. Having a weak relationship with your 2IC when your crew is prone to mutiny is stupid. Young's personal vendetta with Telford clouded his judgement.

GateroomGuard
June 6th, 2010, 06:44 PM
So far I've gathered that Young had every military right to behave as he did. He got permission from O'neall to perform the interragation and he did not need to inform his subordinates of his plans for exocising the brain washing.

But with all that said.

Young's handling of the situation did not foster any good relationships with his crew. He is just too self centered to realise that his 2IC is trained to question his morally questionable killing of another Colonel or person. And to add injury to insult, he back handed Scott's constructive criticism without thought of repercussions of his actions. It'd be in Young's best interest if after the Lucian Alliance incursion he had a fatherly-son talk with Scott to make him not feel so pitiful.

Young should have realise that he has a role in training Scott to becoming a better officer. And to build a stronger bond of loyalty with his 2IC. Having a weak relationship with your 2IC when your crew is prone to mutiny is stupid. Young's personal vendetta with Telford clouded his judgement.

I have to disagree. Young should not be treating Scott like a son, he should be treating him like an officer. He shouldn't be coddling him, he should be training Scott to have the guts to relieve him of command when he goes overboard.

Scott shouldn't be complaining to Young if Young does something illegal(in Scotts mind) Scott should be trained to but Young in the brig. Scotts job is not to tell Young "I think your being bad and I think you should stop" His job is to say "Your relieved." Or your under arrest. Sadly Scott looks to Young as a father and Young seems to be looking to Scott as a son. If Scott wasn't 2IC it would be alright but Scott has responsibilities that mean their relationship has to change.

pipi
June 6th, 2010, 06:57 PM
I have to disagree. Young should not be treating Scott like a son, he should be treating him like an officer. He shouldn't be coddling him, he should be training Scott to have the guts to relieve him of command when he goes overboard.


That is kind of a command suicide. I prefer to training subordinates to 'have my back' all the time. Sleeping with a gun under the pillow is too stressful. If you can't trust your 2IC you're screwed. He's the most likely to put a bullet in the back of your head.

meo3000
June 6th, 2010, 07:02 PM
But we dont see that kind of behavior from TJ (1stLt) or James (2ndLt). Why?

At this point, TJ should be 2IC.

Avenger
June 6th, 2010, 07:05 PM
And as far as training Scott goes, if something happens to Young, Scott takes command and needs to be ready to do so at any moment. Part of that would include including Scott in his major command decisions, including this one.

Phenom
June 6th, 2010, 07:11 PM
How was Scott to know that Young had a plan (and it was a gamble at that, bringing a dude back from the dead)? Scott saw Telford/Rush pretty much dead and gone so was right to at least query what was going on. I didn't mind Young not telling him either, but Scott questioning things was fine as well. Greer on the other hand doesn't think, he just acts. At least Scott had the presence of mind to think a bit.

GateroomGuard
June 6th, 2010, 07:21 PM
That is kind of a command suicide. I prefer to training subordinates to 'have my back' all the time. Sleeping with a gun under the pillow is too stressful. If you can't trust your 2IC you're screwed. He's the most likely to put a bullet in the back of your head.

I'm sure Young would like that but a 2IC has to have the crews best interest and law above his liking of his commander. A 2IC is not supposed to be the CO's cheerleader, he's there to follow his commander unless his commander puts the crew in wrongful danger, or breaks the law, or orders an immoral act against the rules of war.

Scott sees Young as his father and Young sees Scott as a son. TJ and Young are like a divorced couple. James is like the daughter constantly trying to get her father Young's approval. I have to hand it to Young, all of his officers live to please him.

EllieVee
June 6th, 2010, 07:23 PM
How was Scott to know that Young had a plan (and it was a gamble at that, bringing a dude back from the dead)? Scott saw Telford/Rush pretty much dead and gone so was right to at least query what was going on. I didn't mind Young not telling him either, but Scott questioning things was fine as well. Greer on the other hand doesn't think, he just acts. At least Scott had the presence of mind to think a bit.

Young: I know what I'm doing
Scott: What you're doing is killing him.

Had Young deigned to inform his 2IC of what he was doing, Scott, as he said, would have had his back. All Young achieved with Scott is making himself look like a lunatic (again) and ensuring Scott cannot trust him or Greer.

jmoz
June 6th, 2010, 07:56 PM
Think Young wants Scott to grow and learn things on his own, to think on his own and learn from Young's actions. As much as I like Greer, he won't ever become a leader. Scott might because he's willing to make judgments on his own, even if they're bad. One that can think and decide on actions to take rather than follow orders.

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 7th, 2010, 02:36 AM
Young: I know what I'm doing
Scott: What you're doing is killing him.

Had Young deigned to inform his 2IC of what he was doing, Scott, as he said, would have had his back. All Young achieved with Scott is making himself look like a lunatic (again) and ensuring Scott cannot trust him or Greer.

This. It is important to let your subordinates know what is going on. The military values this, to the point where myself and my unit have had to sit through lectures detailing ISAF forces goals in Afghanistan on a strategic level. It is important to let subordinate know as much information as possible, so that they can flow your orders and understand the CO's intentions, so that if necessary, if the subordinate needs to make decisions on the fly as the situation changes, he can do so while trying to further the overall goals of the mission. In this case if Young had told Scott and Wray what was going on then he would have had far less trouble and less risk of a rift in the crew.

There are a lot of people here who clearly have no idea what they're talking about. Telford is a member of the United States military, accused of a crime, as such he is required to have a fair trial. Torturing for information is morally dubious at best, Young appeared to be killing him. People who say that Scott should shut up when Young appears to be killing a prisoner, basically committing murder and killing their only source of intel, really don't know what they are talking about. There were people who stood by while stuff like this happened, and they had a little trial at Nuremburg and was subsequently executed for war crimes.

EllieVee
June 7th, 2010, 02:39 AM
There were people who stood by while stuff like this happened, and they had a little trial at Nuremburg and was subsequently executed for war crimes.

<cynicism> Except for the ones recruited for the US space program, of course. </cynicism>

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 7th, 2010, 02:46 AM
<cynicism> Except for the ones recruited for the US space program, of course. </cynicism>

Indeed.

Sami_
June 7th, 2010, 05:12 AM
Telford is a member of the United States military, accused of a crime, as such he is required to have a fair trial.

It would have been impossible to give him a fair trial, his body was with the LA so at best he would only get the same mockery of a trial that Young had on Destiny.

They brought a three-star General on board to listen to what he had to say, I think they did as much to satisfy his right to trial as they could given the situation and importance of time.

There wasn't even much point in giving him a trial since they didn't have him in custody, any verdict they came to would be meaningless once he switched back to his body. Whatever we think we know about how the US military works we shouldn't forget that Young was acting with the approval of a three-star General, so at the very least his actions were appropriate within the context of how SGU has defined military procedures.

Sorry to say The Mighty 6 platoon but I don't think your TA experience covers US Air Force top secret operations in another galaxy.

xxxevilgrinxxx
June 7th, 2010, 07:21 AM
To further this about Telford, there's reason to believe that Telford wasn't himself in any case. Trial of a brainwashed man? What does that serve?Yes, he's guilty as hell while brainwashed and innocent while not? He clearly gave more information in his unbrainwashed state than he did while under the control of someone else.

As for Scott, in Subversion, it was Scott himself who said that they couldn't trust ANYBODY. And yet what does Scott do? Tell people. Yeah, perhaps he felt he was right but I think he's been proven wrong.

PG15
June 7th, 2010, 10:00 AM
How was he proven wrong when telling Wray did no damage whatsoever?

xxxevilgrinxxx
June 7th, 2010, 10:05 AM
How was he proven wrong when telling Wray did no damage whatsoever?

well, Telford isn't dead and I think the damage is something that may happen later. Scott's definitely sweating that decision, is it regret? who knows. I'm waiting it out to see :)

Sami_
June 7th, 2010, 10:33 AM
How was he proven wrong when telling Wray did no damage whatsoever?

Well I think it was the wrong decision in hindsight, all he has done is irked his superior officer.

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 7th, 2010, 12:23 PM
It would have been impossible to give him a fair trial, his body was with the LA so at best he would only get the same mockery of a trial that Young had on Destiny.

They brought a three-star General on board to listen to what he had to say, I think they did as much to satisfy his right to trial as they could given the situation and importance of time.

There wasn't even much point in giving him a trial since they didn't have him in custody, any verdict they came to would be meaningless once he switched back to his body. Whatever we think we know about how the US military works we shouldn't forget that Young was acting with the approval of a three-star General, so at the very least his actions were appropriate within the context of how SGU has defined military procedures.

Sorry to say The Mighty 6 platoon but I don't think your TA experience covers US Air Force top secret operations in another galaxy.

My TA experience can happily tell me a number of things. 1. killing a prisoner is flat out against military law. 2. Killing the one prisoner with information is totally counterproductive and 3. O'Neill orders Young to take the interrogation to the next level, not kill him. I'm not arguing that Young doing an impromture rite of Malsahran was wrong, it was the right course of action, it however is stupid to not let your subordinates know what is going on. There's operational security then there compartmentalizing information to the point where a unit cannot function effectively.

Blackhole
June 7th, 2010, 01:10 PM
My TA experience can happily tell me a number of things. 1. killing a prisoner is flat out against military law. 2. Killing the one prisoner with information is totally counterproductive and 3. O'Neill orders Young to take the interrogation to the next level, not kill him. I'm not arguing that Young doing an impromture rite of Malsahran was wrong, it was the right course of action, it however is stupid to not let your subordinates know what is going on. There's operational security then there compartmentalizing information to the point where a unit cannot function effectively.

I think it was necessary to keep both Scott and Wray in the dark to preserve the theater of the threat that Young was presenting to Telford. If he had told them then Telford would likely have picked up on their lack of fear and it would have undermined what he was attempting. Young probably knew this and did what was necessary. Afterward, I think it would have been good to have explained this to Scott rather than chastising him. It is Scott's duty to do what he thinks is right and the simple fact remains is that Young has an anger problem and did marooned Rush on the planet. Ironically it is probably this fact that Telford was aware of that made Young's threat believable and so effective.

xxxevilgrinxxx
June 7th, 2010, 01:21 PM
I think it was necessary to keep both Scott and Wray in the dark to preserve the theater of the threat that Young was presenting to Telford. If he had told them then Telford would likely have picked up on their lack of fear and it would have undermined what he was attempting. Young probably knew this and did what was necessary. Afterward, I think it would have been good to have explained this to Scott rather than chastising him. It is Scott's duty to do what he thinks is right and the simple fact remains is that Young has an anger problem and did marooned Rush on the planet. Ironically it is probably this fact that Telford was aware of that made Young's threat believable and so effective.

Young also couldn't be sure who else would be told. What if he tells Scott, Scott tells Wray, Wray blabs it all over the ship, someone tells SGC and before you can snap your fingers, whoever else may be tied in with the LA knows exactly what is happening and plans change. Plans that people, like Rush, risked their lives for. I understand where TM6P is coming from but this isn't solely a military deal and we;re into intelligence circles where the rules are a little different. I can get behind Scott taking on Young over the event, but telling Wray? That's a whole other ball of wax.

Blackhole
June 7th, 2010, 01:33 PM
Young also couldn't be sure who else would be told. What if he tells Scott, Scott tells Wray, Wray blabs it all over the ship, someone tells SGC and before you can snap your fingers, whoever else may be tied in with the LA knows exactly what is happening and plans change. Plans that people, like Rush, risked their lives for. I understand where TM6P is coming from but this isn't solely a military deal and we;re into intelligence circles where the rules are a little different. I can get behind Scott taking on Young over the event, but telling Wray? That's a whole other ball of wax.

I hadn't considered the intelligence angle with Wray. She probably would be the least trustworthy person to tell a secret to.

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 7th, 2010, 01:40 PM
I think it was necessary to keep both Scott and Wray in the dark to preserve the theater of the threat that Young was presenting to Telford. If he had told them then Telford would likely have picked up on their lack of fear and it would have undermined what he was attempting. Young probably knew this and did what was necessary. Afterward, I think it would have been good to have explained this to Scott rather than chastising him. It is Scott's duty to do what he thinks is right and the simple fact remains is that Young has an anger problem and did marooned Rush on the planet. Ironically it is probably this fact that Telford was aware of that made Young's threat believable and so effective.

But there was no need to keep up a pretence of threat for Telford, he wasn't meaning to frighten or threaten him, he meant to bring him to the brink of death to bring him out of the brainwashing.


Young also couldn't be sure who else would be told. What if he tells Scott, Scott tells Wray, Wray blabs it all over the ship, someone tells SGC and before you can snap your fingers, whoever else may be tied in with the LA knows exactly what is happening and plans change. Plans that people, like Rush, risked their lives for. I understand where TM6P is coming from but this isn't solely a military deal and we;re into intelligence circles where the rules are a little different. I can get behind Scott taking on Young over the event, but telling Wray? That's a whole other ball of wax.Except that Wray still knows and can still blab what was going on round the ship. If Young had taken a minute to explain to Scott and Wray what was going on after he had given the order to vent the atmosphere there would have been far less problems, at least from Scott. With regards to Opsec it would simply mean that they would know what was going on 5 minutes earlier.

Shai Hulud
June 7th, 2010, 01:52 PM
well, Telford isn't dead and I think the damage is something that may happen later. Scott's definitely sweating that decision, is it regret? who knows. I'm waiting it out to see :)

Scott ratting to Wray could well throw a spanner in the works between Young and Scott, if Young cant trust his right hand man to keep his mouth shut then perhaps he'll have to get a new one?

Blackhole
June 7th, 2010, 05:25 PM
But there was no need to keep up a pretence of threat for Telford, he wasn't meaning to frighten or threaten him, he meant to bring him to the brink of death to bring him out of the brainwashing.

Except that Wray still knows and can still blab what was going on round the ship. If Young had taken a minute to explain to Scott and Wray what was going on after he had given the order to vent the atmosphere there would have been far less problems, at least from Scott. With regards to Opsec it would simply mean that they would know what was going on 5 minutes earlier.

I disagree it was the fear of death that Telford had to experience not actual death. If Young had told Scott and Wray then the apparent menace of his action would have been much less. If Telford suspected that he would immediately be revived then I don't think the experience would have been nearly as effective. It is the fear that causes one to relive their experiences or in Telford's case probably to flash them.

xxxevilgrinxxx
June 7th, 2010, 05:30 PM
I'm still thinking that telling Wray was a mistake. Sure, she can guess at what's going on but I still don't like the idea of her knowing what's going on, especially if all she has to do is put a little pressure on Scott and he talks. They still don't know if this thing begins and ends with telford and I'm thinking that for the LA to put all their eggs in that one basket and have no one else working for them doesn't make a lot of sense. I think Young was right to play this close to the chest and keep as few people in it as possible. I suppose it's just a matter of waiting it out and seeing what the writers have in store, but I really doubt this is over.

Blackhole
June 7th, 2010, 05:51 PM
I'm still thinking that telling Wray was a mistake. Sure, she can guess at what's going on but I still don't like the idea of her knowing what's going on, especially if all she has to do is put a little pressure on Scott and he talks. They still don't know if this thing begins and ends with telford and I'm thinking that for the LA to put all their eggs in that one basket and have no one else working for them doesn't make a lot of sense. I think Young was right to play this close to the chest and keep as few people in it as possible. I suppose it's just a matter of waiting it out and seeing what the writers have in store, but I really doubt this is over.

I think you may have wanted to quote TM6p's reply rather than mine.

I agree with you for the reasons you indicated that keeping Wray in the dark would have been better and Scott shouldn't have told her anything.

xxxevilgrinxxx
June 7th, 2010, 05:55 PM
I think you may have wanted to address your reply to TM6p.

I agree with you for the reasons you indicated that keeping Wray in the dark would have been better and Scott shouldn't have told her anything.

you're right, I think a quote tag got confuzzled somewhere :) I'll edit...
It could have been as easy as telling her she'd have to wait for Young to state, even if it was just to pass her off with an "answers are coming" sort of response

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 8th, 2010, 03:17 AM
I disagree it was the fear of death that Telford had to experience not actual death. If Young had told Scott and Wray then the apparent menace of his action would have been much less. If Telford suspected that he would immediately be revived then I don't think the experience would have been nearly as effective. It is the fear that causes one to relive their experiences or in Telford's case probably to flash them.
Previous experience with the rite of Mal Sharan seems to show it was the actual death, rather than fear of death that has the effect. Teal'c seemed to have no qualms about dying in Threshold.

I'm still thinking that telling Wray was a mistake. Sure, she can guess at what's going on but I still don't like the idea of her knowing what's going on, especially if all she has to do is put a little pressure on Scott and he talks. They still don't know if this thing begins and ends with telford and I'm thinking that for the LA to put all their eggs in that one basket and have no one else working for them doesn't make a lot of sense. I think Young was right to play this close to the chest and keep as few people in it as possible. I suppose it's just a matter of waiting it out and seeing what the writers have in store, but I really doubt this is over.
But she knows regardless. She saw the whole thing, she know Telford recovers. Telling her 5 minutes earlier will do nothing more than simply prevent a rift.

Regardless you two are both getting away from the topic at hand. Whether it was right or wrong for Young not to tell Scott, he cannot blame Scott for doing his duty in questioning his orders.

Blackhole
June 8th, 2010, 03:47 AM
Previous experience with the rite of Mal Sharan seems to show it was the actual death, rather than fear of death that has the effect. Teal'c seemed to have no qualms about dying in Threshold.

But she knows regardless. She saw the whole thing, she know Telford recovers. Telling her 5 minutes earlier will do nothing more than simply prevent a rift.

Regardless you two are both getting away from the topic at hand. Whether it was right or wrong for Young not to tell Scott, he cannot blame Scott for doing his duty in questioning his orders.

The only experience I am aware of is in that particular episode. The Gateworld episode description indicates Teal'c "pleads" for his life. One wouldn't plead unless they were afraid and really thought they were going to die. I think the fear is an integral part of the ritual. If Telford had no doubt that Young would have resuscitated him I don't think he would have relived anything. I still think telling Scott and Wray could have potentially undermined the menace of Young's ploy. I think he should have explained better to them afterwards particularly to Scott.

meo3000
June 8th, 2010, 05:54 AM
The question is How Did Scott Ever Pass Military Training?

I choose to believe he slept his way through it. Knowing the right people will do wonders for your career.

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 8th, 2010, 06:13 AM
The question is How Did Scott Ever Pass Military Training?

I choose to believe he slept his way through it. Knowing the right people will do wonders for your career.

Not through officer training. Besides as repeatedly pointed out he's actually followed his training to the letter.

Ser Scot A Ellison
June 8th, 2010, 07:17 AM
Shai Hulud,


Was good to see Young putting him firmly in his place at the start of the episode with his little line about following orders. Scott's not suited to command, on Earth he'd be the equivalent of Walter, desk jockey pushing paper and pens.

So, "just following orders" should be a defense when a superior officer is doing something a Junior officer believes is violating the UCMJ?

xxxevilgrinxxx
June 8th, 2010, 07:34 AM
....
Regardless you two are both getting away from the topic at hand. Whether it was right or wrong for Young not to tell Scott, he cannot blame Scott for doing his duty in questioning his orders.No, I don't believe he can (or even would) question Scott's duty to question orders and Scott has defied orders before. I do think he can question Scott telling Wray anything but as we don't hear him prder Scott not to, it's left to a judgment call on Scott's part, which is a much more fluid matter.

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 8th, 2010, 11:31 AM
No, I don't believe he can (or even would) question Scott's duty to question orders and Scott has defied orders before. I do think he can question Scott telling Wray anything but as we don't hear him prder Scott not to, it's left to a judgment call on Scott's part, which is a much more fluid matter.

Hence we can trundle towards a logical conclusion just fine. Scott passed military training fine, and is using what he learned in practice on the Destiny.

xxxevilgrinxxx
June 8th, 2010, 11:51 AM
Hence we can trundle towards a logical conclusion just fine. Scott passed military training fine, and is using what he learned in practice on the Destiny.

not arguing and I'm not the OP so I didn't word the subject to get this kind of response :D

Quadhelix
June 8th, 2010, 01:11 PM
What confuses me about this thread is the fact that a bunch of people who have never spent so much as a day in the military are lecturing an actual soldier on how the military chain of command works.

xxxevilgrinxxx
June 8th, 2010, 01:49 PM
What confuses me about this thread is the fact that a bunch of people who have never spent so much as a day in the military are lecturing an actual soldier on how the military chain of command works.

well, you know what they say about assumptions :)

pipi
June 8th, 2010, 04:57 PM
What confuses me about this thread is the fact that a bunch of people who have never spent so much as a day in the military are lecturing an actual soldier on how the military chain of command works.

How it works and how it should work can get blurred. Debating facts is boring, there is only one outcome.

Avenger
June 8th, 2010, 06:16 PM
What confuses me about this thread is the fact that a bunch of people who have never spent so much as a day in the military are lecturing an actual soldier on how the military chain of command works.

Someone not in the military can have a decent enough understanding of how the chain of command works. That's not really that complicated. You don't have to have been in the military to have a basic understanding of what officer training entails either. There are enough real world examples in the news and enough documentaries out there to know things like an officer having the duty not to follow illegal orders.

Joachim
June 8th, 2010, 06:52 PM
To all of those complaining about Scott and Wray... keep it up. I hope you have material to complain about until you finally get sick of it.

Steelbox
June 9th, 2010, 06:51 AM
For me Scott was right about trying to convince Young into letting him go. He even "ordered" young to not get up on an earlier episode, this shows that he has balls. As TM6P said, your subordinates need to know what is happening so they can think and make dicisions the right way. Scott did not know so he made its decision based on what he was seeing and known. What he did wrong was, whining to Young.

Also what is the definition of torture? Causing pain but not killing? He was trying to kill, pain was just an colaterall effect, but welcome. So was it technicaly torture?

Alexandria7
June 9th, 2010, 06:56 AM
How many people do you know who are really cut out for their jobs? 1 maybe 2 out of hundreds? Work is work, he was 2nd IC on a base noone thought was gonna work. That like being mad the assistant manager at wendys cant win the Alamo. lulz

The problem with that is he's an officer in the US military. They rarely ever get to sit on the beach, sipping margaritas - they do not get stationed in great places . They go to the crappy places that most people would never dream of working at. It would be different if he was a civilian, but he is not. If he was going to wash out, he'd have done so in boot camp or knife and fork school (aka officer candidate school). They are held to a higher standard than normal people. If they aren't cut out for their job, then it's pretty obvious within that first six weeks.

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 9th, 2010, 08:05 AM
The problem with that is he's an officer in the US military. They rarely ever get to sit on the beach, sipping margaritas - they do not get stationed in great places . They go to the crappy places that most people would never dream of working at. It would be different if he was a civilian, but he is not. If he was going to wash out, he'd have done so in boot camp or knife and fork school (aka officer candidate school). They are held to a higher standard than normal people. If they aren't cut out for their job, then it's pretty obvious within that first six weeks.

Err, no. While I'll defend Scott to the end, that what he did in questioning Young was the right thing to do, and that he would have passed through military training fine, even the military can produce officers who are not up to scratch. People like this guy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhGIFLWadEU

Now that's a clip from Generation Kill, but it was based on real events and they had to tone stuff down, because they thought no one would believe some of the stuff that happened with him. While most officers are competent, indeed the vast majority of officers I've served under have been extremely competent individuals who I would trust my life with, that doesn't stop the occasional person from slipping though. As I said the vast majority of officers and NCO's I have served with have been excellent, there have been a few who have been less than stellar though. Not even military training can weed everybody out and you can't tell whether someone will truly hack it in a combat zone until they actually get there.

EllieVee
June 9th, 2010, 04:27 PM
Err, no. While I'll defend Scott to the end, that what he did in questioning Young was the right thing to do, and that he would have passed through military training fine, even the military can produce officers who are not up to scratch. People like this guy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhGIFLWadEU

Now that's a clip from Generation Kill, but it was based on real events and they had to tone stuff down, because they thought no one would believe some of the stuff that happened with him. While most officers are competent, indeed the vast majority of officers I've served under have been extremely competent individuals who I would trust my life with, that doesn't stop the occasional person from slipping though. As I said the vast majority of officers and NCO's I have served with have been excellent, there have been a few who have been less than stellar though. Not even military training can weed everybody out and you can't tell whether someone will truly hack it in a combat zone until they actually get there.

Ah, good old Captain America. The only competent officer they've got is the young Lieutenant.

Avenger
June 9th, 2010, 10:00 PM
And Encino Man as the company commander. No luck there either.

EllieVee
June 9th, 2010, 11:59 PM
And Encino Man as the company commander. No luck there either.

Favourite moment is when Doc tells Encino Man that he's incompetent.

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 10th, 2010, 02:26 AM
Ah, good old Captain America. The only competent officer they've got is the young Lieutenant.

Not really. The series showed most of their officers were very competent, Godfather, Captain Patterson, Major Eckloff, Fick. The only two screw ups were Encino Man and Captain America. In Captain America's case it was because he was an intelligence officer originally. Recon Marines were supposed to operate in small teams with NCO's as their team leaders, as they did in Afghanistan, but instead they rolled through Iraq in a big column of vehicles, meaning a number of officers who were not suited for command of companies on the ground were in the unit.

Avenger
June 10th, 2010, 02:31 AM
It was more than just that. Encino Man and Captain America had zero combat experience and weren't fully trained Recon Marines either.

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 10th, 2010, 02:38 AM
It was more than just that. Encino Man and Captain America had zero combat experience and weren't fully trained Recon Marines either.

Well in Captain America's case it's not cause he's dumb, but as you point out because he isn't trained. Every time he starts screaming down the radio for example, he actually has a point, however the rest of the Marines already know whatever he's screaming down the radio and are just annoyed he's jamming the coms with his chatter.

Encino Man was just a dumbass though. :P

But there is a stark difference between some of the other marine officers and Encino Man and Captain America. But that's still a good example of no matter how good your unit is, you can still get lumbered with idiots.

Avenger
June 10th, 2010, 02:42 AM
One of the Marines, I forget who, said that Captain America was a really smart guy and that he just tended to panic. And both of them were very good at their intelligence jobs that they had prior to being assigned to 1st Recon.

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 10th, 2010, 02:48 AM
One of the Marines, I forget who, said that Captain America was a really smart guy and that he just tended to panic. And both of them were very good at their intelligence jobs that they had prior to being assigned to 1st Recon.

Captain America of course also had a problem with being gunho. "Doing his rambo" :D

Ser Scot A Ellison
June 10th, 2010, 05:01 AM
Something that has been bugging me from the get go. We've got a bird Col. who was evacuated to Destiny. We've got at least three Lt's who were evacuated to destiny. A number of NCO's and other enlisted personel. Where are the other mid level officers, Capitans, Majors and such. Icarus was a sizable base and they evacuated a large number of civilians and military personel to the ship. Why were the only officers evacuated low level officers and one high level officer? That seems unlikely to me.

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 10th, 2010, 05:24 AM
Something that has been bugging me from the get go. We've got a bird Col. who was evacuated to Destiny. We've got at least three Lt's who were evacuated to destiny. A number of NCO's and other enlisted personel. Where are the other mid level officers, Capitans, Majors and such. Icarus was a sizable base and they evacuated a large number of civilians and military personel to the ship. Why were the only officers evacuated low level officers and one high level officer? That seems unlikely to me.

Because the remaining officers were outside, commanding the defence against the LA. There are quite a few officers round the dinner table during Air. Of the officers, Scott was busy escorting Eli, Chloe and the Senator to the Gateroom, TJ was helping injured civilians and James I would imagine would be in charge of the guards in the gate room. Greer and Young only arrive at the gateroom by chance, their position is destroyed by a burning glider smashing into it forcing them to fall back. The other personnel on the other gun positions are referenced by Carter about being beamed up to the Hammond.

meo3000
June 10th, 2010, 07:19 AM
Cause with Captains and Majors, we wouldnt have the chance of having a young good looking 2IC, and there would be less conflict with the civilians since our Col would be better advised.

So less conflict, less drama.

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 10th, 2010, 12:12 PM
Cause with Captains and Majors, we wouldnt have the chance of having a young good looking 2IC, and there would be less conflict with the civilians since our Col would be better advised.

So less conflict, less drama.

If there were Captain's and Major's on the ship, there would still be the opportunity for more drama, seeing as how with greater authority and experience than the young officers they would represent an alternative to Young's command. Young being Young wouldn't let go that easily though.

Ser Scot A Ellison
June 10th, 2010, 12:37 PM
TM6P,

Why was Young commanding a single gun emplacement anyway? Shouldn't he have been corrdinating the overall defense from some sort of CiC center with mid level officers in charge of the individual points of defense?

An admiral wouldn't command the individual ship on which he places his flag the ships capitan would. The command of the fleet would be for the admiral.

jelgate
June 10th, 2010, 01:33 PM
TM6P,

Why was Young commanding a single gun emplacement anyway? Shouldn't he have been corrdinating the overall defense from some sort of CiC center with mid level officers in charge of the individual points of defense?

An admiral wouldn't command the individual ship on which he places his flag the ships capitan would. The command of the fleet would be for the admiral.
limitied military personel

Ser Scot A Ellison
June 10th, 2010, 02:10 PM
Jelgate,

With the budget they had for Icarus why are there limited military personel available to defend the base? That seems odd.

xxxevilgrinxxx
June 10th, 2010, 02:32 PM
TM6P,

Why was Young commanding a single gun emplacement anyway? Shouldn't he have been corrdinating the overall defense from some sort of CiC center with mid level officers in charge of the individual points of defense?

An admiral wouldn't command the individual ship on which he places his flag the ships capitan would. The command of the fleet would be for the admiral.

maybe it's part of Young's makeup to be right there in the middle? Just speculation because it hasn't been fleshed out any better, but it did put him in a place to be where he ended up

Cory Holmes
June 10th, 2010, 02:39 PM
Right from the get-go, Young has always led from the front. The attack on Icarus Base is no exception to this.

Also, the admiral analogy is incorrect. Admirals are O-7 and up; Young is an O-6, equivalent to a ship's captain.

jelgate
June 10th, 2010, 02:43 PM
Jelgate,

With the budget they had for Icarus why are there limited military personel available to defend the base? That seems odd.

It seems standard given past Stargate bases. The cost of Icarus was directed towards researching the 9th chevron

Ser Scot A Ellison
June 10th, 2010, 03:43 PM
Cory,


Right from the get-go, Young has always led from the front. The attack on Icarus Base is no exception to this.

Also, the admiral analogy is incorrect. Admirals are O-7 and up; Young is an O-6, equivalent to a ship's captain.

Well, then please allow me to construct a better analogy. Would it be proper for the Captain of a ship to be focused on one particular gun turret rather than fighting with the entire ship?

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 10th, 2010, 04:44 PM
Cory,



Well, then please allow me to construct a better analogy. Would it be proper for the Captain of a ship to be focused on one particular gun turret rather than fighting with the entire ship?

But from his position he can observe the battle and give orders, something he couldn't do inside the mountain. While he could have been in the base and tried to give orders there, it wouldn't have done much good in this case, a commander would need to have eyes on of the situation.

LtColCarter
June 10th, 2010, 05:38 PM
Err, it's Scott's job to question his superior if he thinks he's about to commit illegal actions. It's his duty to stop him. Please actually know something about the military before jumping to conclusions.

Amen

Ser Scot A Ellison
June 10th, 2010, 07:17 PM
TM6P,

Yes, but under fire he has a harder time directing the overall response to the attack. I understand leading from the front. I simply question it's utility. A friend's Dad was a Major in the U.S.M.C. During Vietnam he wouldn't allow his platoon leaders to carry rifles. His logic was simple. If they are doing their job, directing their forces in attack or defense, they will not need one. If things go south there will be plenty of rifles for them to pick up if necessary.

wargrafix
June 10th, 2010, 07:24 PM
I think the real question is, How did Greer pass? I swear he would have strangled someone while at bootcamp out of unbridled rage

Cory Holmes
June 10th, 2010, 07:51 PM
I think the real question is, How did Greer pass? I swear he would have strangled someone while at bootcamp out of unbridled rage

That's unfair. We've seen before that Greer, for the most part, has his "unbridled" rage under control and is perfectly willing to follow orders from officers he doesn't like. But when he does find an officer he likes, such as Young, he'll do anything asked of him without question or hesitation.

fmbchris
June 10th, 2010, 08:17 PM
he banged his drill sargent

Avenger
June 10th, 2010, 11:12 PM
I think the real question is, How did Greer pass? I swear he would have strangled someone while at bootcamp out of unbridled rage

He obviously didn't. Greer is a hardass, no doubt, but unbridled rage is quite a stretch.

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 11th, 2010, 04:17 AM
TM6P,

Yes, but under fire he has a harder time directing the overall response to the attack. I understand leading from the front. I simply question it's utility. A friend's Dad was a Major in the U.S.M.C. During Vietnam he wouldn't allow his platoon leaders to carry rifles. His logic was simple. If they are doing their job, directing their forces in attack or defense, they will not need one. If things go south there will be plenty of rifles for them to pick up if necessary.

I don't see Young blazing away with his UMP, I see him observing the battlespace and communicating on the radio. The best data on a battlefield is your own eyes, you need to see what's going on. Whether you're carrying a rifle or not has very little to do with it, your friends dad would go against current Marine doctrine which I believe who started issuing rifles to all ranks from colonel and below. Same is true in the British Army, but as I said that's beside the point.

Whether it's a section, platoon, company or battalion commander the good leader won't be firing his weapon much, but he will try and get eyes on the situation and be busy controlling their personnel. The rifle is there for personnel defence and arguably people prefer rifles because they're better weapons than pistols and the like. Young himself doesn't carry a rifle, he carries a sub machine gun, a less effective but smaller and lighter weapon, allowing him freedom to move around and direct the situation.

Ser Scot A Ellison
June 11th, 2010, 05:03 AM
TM6P,


I don't see Young blazing away with his UMP, I see him observing the battlespace and communicating on the radio. The best data on a battlefield is your own eyes, you need to see what's going on. Whether you're carrying a rifle or not has very little to do with it, your friends dad would go against current Marine doctrine which I believe who started issuing rifles to all ranks from colonel and below. Same is true in the British Army, but as I said that's beside the point.

Whether it's a section, platoon, company or battalion commander the good leader won't be firing his weapon much, but he will try and get eyes on the situation and be busy controlling their personnel. The rifle is there for personnel defence and arguably people prefer rifles because they're better weapons than pistols and the like. Young himself doesn't carry a rifle, he carries a sub machine gun, a less effective but smaller and lighter weapon, allowing him freedom to move around and direct the situation.

Fair enough. My point about the rifle was less about carrying the wrong weapon and more about what a platoon leader, company or base commander should be doing with their time. My reading of your post suggests you agree. I do wonder why, for a base commander, being out among the tracers is better than being in a CiC with good tactical information and less chance of getting your head blown off. If nothing else not having a realatively safe CiC center seems like poor planning and design.

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 11th, 2010, 05:32 AM
TM6P,



Fair enough. My point about the rifle was less about carrying the wrong weapon and more about what a platoon leader, company or base commander should be doing with their time. My reading of your post suggests you agree. I do wonder why, for a base commander, being out among the tracers is better than being in a CiC with good tactical information and less chance of getting your head blown off. If nothing else not having a realatively safe CiC center seems like poor planning and design.

Bit pointless trying to direct a defence against an air attack from a CIC, stuff happens to quickly to be effective. Like I say the best thing for a commander to do is to get an eyes on of the situation. Commanders in certain situations can't do this, be they Generals in command of divisions or ship captains, but this is because of the size of the battlefield involved.

Cory Holmes
June 11th, 2010, 02:47 PM
Also, discussions about how "that's not how it works in real life!" need to remember that Young is a lead-from-the-front kind of guy. It's one of his character flaws and is part of the reason he resigned as an SG Team leader.

Blackhole
June 11th, 2010, 04:31 PM
If there were Captain's and Major's on the ship, there would still be the opportunity for more drama, seeing as how with greater authority and experience than the young officers they would represent an alternative to Young's command. Young being Young wouldn't let go that easily though.

There would be the opportunity for different drama. If they were present, then they would represent far more viable alternatives to replace him in command. Lt Scott is second in command and is on his first deep space mission. Why would Scott’s character be constructed that way if not to deliberately limit his readiness to assume command? There are no higher officers on Destiny because the writers didn’t want any present because they would represent viable command alternates to Young. Imo I think it allows Young’s character the freedom to make more grievous mistakes without the option of someone else present in the military chain of command that can step in and replace him. The inability or at least great difficulty in replacing him is one of the central core circumstances that the show's dramatic conflict revolves around.

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 11th, 2010, 05:37 PM
There would be the opportunity for different drama. If they were present, then they would represent far more viable alternatives to replace him in command. Lt Scott is second in command and is on his first deep space mission. Why would Scott’s character be constructed that way if not to deliberately limit his readiness to assume command? There are no higher officers on Destiny because the writers didn’t want any present because they would represent viable command alternates to Young. Imo I think it allows Young’s character the freedom to make more grievous mistakes without the option of someone else present in the military chain of command that can step in and replace him. The inability or at least great difficulty in replacing him is one of the central core circumstances that the show's dramatic conflict revolves around.

Indeed. One reason I think the writers went with low ranking officers is that the conflict would become military v military rather than civilian v military. This offers a more interesting dilemma rather than conflict just within the military which would be a rather BSGesque route similar to stuff like Adama v Cain.

Blackhole
June 11th, 2010, 06:02 PM
Indeed. One reason I think the writers went with low ranking officers is that the conflict would become military v military rather than civilian v military. This offers a more interesting dilemma rather than conflict just within the military which would be a rather BSGesque route similar to stuff like Adama v Cain.

I agree completely. I have enjoyed your realistic military perspective.

I am curious, let us say SGU was real and you found yourself on the ship as part of Young's command. How would you evaluate Young's overall performance as a military commander? Do you think another officer suddenly thrust into similar circumstances could have realistically done any better? Personally, I think Young has done a good job given the very difficult circumstances and limited resources available to him. Let me also say that the affair with TJ was a mistake but does sometimes happen. Look at the affairs that Clinton and many other politicians have had. And I want to add that I think marooning Rush was a big mistake but I think it was an isolated incident. Without basing your opinion solely on the marooning incident what do you think?

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 11th, 2010, 06:13 PM
I agree completely. I have enjoyed your realistic military perspective.

I am curious, let us say SGU was real and you found yourself on the ship as part of Young's command. How would you evaluate Young's overall performance as a military commander? Do you think another officer suddenly thrust into similar circumstances could have realistically done any better? Personally, I think Young has done a good job given the very difficult circumstances and limited resources available to him. Let me also say that the affair with TJ was a mistake but does sometimes happen. Look at the affairs that Clinton and many other politicians have had. And I want to add that I think marooning Rush was a big mistake but I think it was an isolated incident. Without basing your opinion solely on the marooning incident what do you think?

Up to the moment when he waits to long to vent the atmosphere of the gateroom I'd say he did a good job in bad circumstances, with the exception of how he handled Rush. That being said I think any military commander would have had conflict with Rush, they probably would have locked him up. That probably would have still lead to military v civilian conflict, but in deciding to administer the Young brand of summary justice he endangered the trust of his own people. While Greer may have been alright about it, I would have been concerned with Young acting as Judge Jury and executioner as it were, something that I think other military personnel on the Destiny would agree on if they had solid proof of Young's actions.

On the plus side though his command style is excellent, encouraging trust in his people, and taking opinions although retaining enough independence so not to rely on them.

However I think recent eps have shown him crumbling under pressure, failing to distribute information to Wray and Scott and of course his biggest failure was hesitating to act when the LA came through the gate. However up to that point however I think any military commander would have probably had similar problems to him and handled them in mostly similar ways. But this episode is I think a turning point, he made a terrible error, worse I think than marooning Rush in which he was goaded, and the entire situation is screwed up because he failed to act quickly enough. Young I think knows this. So does O'Neill.

Blackhole
June 11th, 2010, 06:19 PM
Up to the moment when he waits to long to vent the atmosphere of the gateroom I'd say he did a good job in bad circumstances, with the exception of how he handled Rush. That being said I think any military commander would have had conflict with Rush, they probably would have locked him up. That probably would have still lead to military v civilian conflict, but in deciding to administer the Young brand of summary justice he endangered the trust of his own people. While Greer may have been alright about it, I would have been concerned with Young acting as Judge Jury and executioner as it were, something that I think other military personnel on the Destiny would agree on if they had solid proof of Young's actions.

On the plus side though his command style is excellent, encouraging trust in his people, and taking opinions although retaining enough independence so not to rely on them.

However I think recent eps have shown him crumbling under pressure, failing to distribute information to Wray and Scott and of course his biggest failure was hesitating to act when the LA came through the gate. However up to that point however I think any military commander would have probably had similar problems to him and handled them in mostly similar ways. But this episode is I think a turning point, he made a terriable error, worse I think than marooning Rush in which he was goaded, and the entire sitution is screwed uo because he failed to act quickly enough. Young. I think knows this. So does O'Neill.

So you think most officers would have immediately sacrificed Telford by venting the atmosphere? I assume they would have ordered the stones disconnected first. You don't think they would have delayed a little to see if they could have gotten the LA to surrender first and hopefully have saved Telford, especially when it comes out that Young and Telford were good friends before the brainwashing? Do you think most officers could and would immediately give the order to kill their friend? I am not suggesting that venting the atmosphere was not the right decision but that making it from the safety of one's couch and when you actually see a close friend die are two completely different situations. I have never been in a combat situation; would most officers have the iron to give the order to sacrifice Telford?

Cory Holmes
June 11th, 2010, 06:26 PM
However I think recent eps have shown him crumbling under pressure, failing to distribute information to Wray and Scott and of course his biggest failure was hesitating to act when the LA came through the gate. However up to that point however I think any military commander would have probably had similar problems to him and handled them in mostly similar ways. But this episode is I think a turning point, he made a terrible error, worse I think than marooning Rush in which he was goaded, and the entire situation is screwed up because he failed to act quickly enough. Young I think knows this. So does O'Neill.
Now there's a good point I'd never considered. So let's run with this for a moment: if you're Colonel Young on board Destiny, how do you relax? How do you deal with the day-to-day stresses of running that ship? How does Young rest and regroup his energies?

Blackhole
June 11th, 2010, 06:29 PM
Now there's a good point I'd never considered. So let's run with this for a moment: if you're Colonel Young on board Destiny, how do you relax? How do you deal with the day-to-day stresses of running that ship? How does Young rest and regroup his energies?

He doesn't!

Cory Holmes
June 11th, 2010, 08:52 PM
He doesn't!

That needs to change. I'm sensing a heartfelt dancing and lovin' seen with TJ in his future ;)

The Mighty 6 platoon
June 12th, 2010, 04:39 AM
So you think most officers would have immediately sacrificed Telford by venting the atmosphere? I assume they would have ordered the stones disconnected first. You don't think they would have delayed a little to see if they could have gotten the LA to surrender first and hopefully have saved Telford, especially when it comes out that Young and Telford were good friends before the brainwashing? Do you think most officers could and would immediately give the order to kill their friend? I am not suggesting that venting the atmosphere was not the right decision but that making it from the safety of one's couch and when you actually see a close friend die are two completely different situations. I have never been in a combat situation; would most officers have the iron to give the order to sacrifice Telford?

The choice is between 80 people that are his responsibly and one man. He needs to make the choice and he needs to be able to do it quickly. Agonize of the consequences later but at the time action is need. I'm not saying that everyone could make the choice, but a Colonel in that position needs to be able to, Young recognizes himself that he has problems with this.

LtColCarter
June 12th, 2010, 10:14 AM
The choice is between 80 people that are his responsibly and one man. He needs to make the choice and he needs to be able to do it quickly. Agonize of the consequences later but at the time action is need. I'm not saying that everyone could make the choice, but a Colonel in that position needs to be able to, Young recognizes himself that he has problems with this.

Very true!

Artemis-Neith
June 12th, 2010, 02:06 PM
The choice is between 80 people that are his responsibly and one man. He needs to make the choice and he needs to be able to do it quickly. Agonize of the consequences later but at the time action is need. I'm not saying that everyone could make the choice, but a Colonel in that position needs to be able to, Young recognizes himself that he has problems with this.

But that's the problem with Young from the beginning, he'll risk his own life and the life of others to rescue one of his people so desperately, and he didn't see it! That's why he's not really fit for this post. That's what O'Neill told him with Carter who left the pilots behind, two seconds longer and she'd risk the whole ship. Young would have failed here. His biggest problem was never clearer shown than in this case.

Blackhole
June 12th, 2010, 07:06 PM
But that's the problem with Young from the beginning, he'll risk his own life and the life of others to rescue one of his people so desperately, and he didn't see it! That's why he's not really fit for this post. That's what O'Neill told him with Carter who left the pilots behind, two seconds longer and she'd risk the whole ship. Young would have failed here. His biggest problem was never clearer shown than in this case.

I think his failure in the season finale is going to be the beginning of his psychological end.

Blackhole
June 12th, 2010, 07:08 PM
The choice is between 80 people that are his responsibly and one man. He needs to make the choice and he needs to be able to do it quickly. Agonize of the consequences later but at the time action is need. I'm not saying that everyone could make the choice, but a Colonel in that position needs to be able to, Young recognizes himself that he has problems with this.

I agree. I wonder what percentage of officers out there would have the iron to make the order.

brian_177
June 12th, 2010, 10:52 PM
If things go south there will be plenty of rifles for them to pick up if necessary.

Was your friend's Dad the old Seargent from 'We Were Soldier?'

Cory Holmes
June 13th, 2010, 08:28 AM
I had a thought last night. We've all been assuming that Young's decision not to vent the room to space was due to his unwillingness to kill Telford along with the LA thugs. But what it part of it had to do with TJ's flat-out rejection of that plan?

"If you're looking for forgiveness, I can't give you that."

How much did that possibly affect his decision?

LtColCarter
June 13th, 2010, 10:38 AM
I had a thought last night. We've all been assuming that Young's decision not to vent the room to space was due to his unwillingness to kill Telford along with the LA thugs. But what it part of it had to do with TJ's flat-out rejection of that plan?

"If you're looking for forgiveness, I can't give you that."

How much did that possibly affect his decision?

Probably none...but what does that have to do with Scott passing his military training?

Ser Scot A Ellison
June 14th, 2010, 03:51 AM
Brian,


Was your friend's Dad the old Seargent from 'We Were Soldier?'

Nope, He's a Marine Corp Major from West Virginia. He ran an air conditioning company in Beaufort SC after he retired from the Corp. He, in the last ten years retired from doing that, has moved back to West Virgina and started a winery. He doesn't like to sit around. I heard that story back in the early 90s (91-92) while visting my friends family in Beaufort.

Camasi
June 14th, 2010, 06:13 PM
I admit that i did not go through all the pages in reading this post. Having said that, i feel the need to interject on the OP. Are you kidding me? Read the uniform code of military justice..especially the bit about questioning unlawful orders.

People saying "Scott is not good for command and he is not up for it blah blah blah.. " That is a bit much. Scott is a Lieutenant.... this is why we have a rank structure. Colonel Young makes mistakes and so will Lieutenant Scott. The ability to command and be a good officer is not given through ROTC, officer training school, field training, etc. While this training is indeed valuable, experience and how one interprets that experience is what boosts someones ability to command. No LT out there is given a command and is expected to be infallible. OP... how could you not understand this? The character of Scott has shown great examples of leadership on this show and is expected to make mistakes at the same time. This is how LT's are broken in... the bit where Greer tells him that he needs to learn is an excellent example of the LT learning from his enlisted leadership.

Some of you have got some wacky ideas on military leadership... lol.

This is spoken from 7 years in the Air Force.

LtColCarter
June 14th, 2010, 06:27 PM
I admit that i did not go through all the pages in reading this post. Having said that, i feel the need to interject on the OP. Are you kidding me? Read the uniform code of military justice..especially the bit about questioning unlawful orders.

People saying "Scott is not good for command and he is not up for it blah blah blah.. " That is a bit much. Scott is a Lieutenant.... this is why we have a rank structure. Colonel Young makes mistakes and so will Lieutenant Scott. The ability to command and be a good officer is not given through ROTC, officer training school, field training, etc. While this training is indeed valuable, experience and how one interprets that experience is what boosts someones ability to command. No LT out there is given a command and is expected to be infallible. OP... how could you not understand this? The character of Scott has shown great examples of leadership on this show and is expected to make mistakes at the same time. This is how LT's are broken in... the bit where Greer tells him that he needs to learn is an excellent example of the LT learning from his enlisted leadership.

Some of you have got some wacky ideas on military leadership... lol.

This is spoken from 7 years in the Air Force.

Very well said...and I agree