What Right Do We Have?

[Ripple in Space]

I just randomly watched "Subversion," which I caught snippets of when it first aired, since I never got into SGU.

Col. Telford in his manic rant made two interesting points:
1.) What gives the SGC the right to use the remaining Ancient technology?

2.) Was it irresponsible to defeat the Goa'uld, Replicators, and Ori without a strategy to fill in the power vacuum, and rebuild the Milky Way?

To the first, I would say the SGC would be able to rebut on the grounds of both ancestry & spirit.

In terms of genetics, it's well established the Jack O'Neill is the closest thing to a genetic Ancient in the Milky Way--that was the whole premise of the Loki/Teen!Jack episode of SG-1--O'Neill being more evolved than the rest of the galaxy. Then, as we know, Jack runs HWS.

Second would be spirit. The Ancients mentored the Asgard, who in turn named humans, specifically the SGC as their successors. Additionally, the Asurans established their jealousy that the Lanteans viewed humans as their "favorite children."

To the second, I would say it may have been somewhat irresponsible for Hammond, O'Neill, and Landry to focus on destroying the Milky Way's hierarchy without an exit/rebuilding strategy. That said, it seems they left them in the hands of Teal'c & Bra'tac who were both experienced leaders of large empires.

What do you think?

[Aesop]

Well I think our "right" to Ancient technology and artifacts perhaps lies in the fact that the second evolution of humanity began on Earth, which was essentially the center of the Ancient's empire in the Milky Way. So it's kind of like "what right does Prince Charles have to the British throne?" Well, he's the direct descendent of a previously reigning monarch(s). Maybe that's a flimsy analogy but I feel like it gets my point across. The second evolution of humanity started on Earth and then was scattered throughout the galaxy by the Goa'uld where humans then further evolved (or didn't, depending on the case). Those that were left on Earth probably had more of a chance of Ancient genes being passed down than, say, the Tollan.

As far as Earth committing to building infrastructure and filling the power vacuum left behind by the Goa'uld and Ori, I think the hope was that there really wouldn't be one. Maybe I'm wrong, but what the SGC saw was one oppressive faction after another dominating less advanced civilizations and if those oppressors were eliminated then the oppressed would be free to live as they pleased without subjugation. Perhaps the galaxy is too big to police it and prevent a faction like the Lucian Alliance from stepping into the Goa'ulds role, I don't know.

[Pytheas]

The first has already been answered, so on the second:

Considering the Goa'uld had been an established empire in the galaxy that ruled over humans (not including its pre-Earth dominion) for at least ten thousand years, I do think it was irresponsible of the SGC not to consider the fact that a lot of those human clans and tribes would rely on the Goa'uld in a number of ways: whether it was protection, governorship or simply the tradition. As far as the former goes, who knows how many other "evil empires" are out there in the Milky Way?! Even at the end of Stargate: SG1's run, there were still plenty of planets to visit in our galaxy.

It's a question of what you really believe in: security or self-determination? In the case of the former, then yes, they showed a great lack of foresight (especially considering this seems to be the philosophy the US applies to most of its international engagements - they didn't simply topple Saddam Hussein's government and then leave the Iraqis to fend for themselves). In the case of the former, then there still should've been an infrastructure in place within the SGC to track the fall of the Goa'uld Empire - the tactic employed during the war seemed to be to just "cut off the serpent's head" (that was meant as an analogy), so it would be irresponsible for them to just simply presume that worlds they don't know about would be able to recover so quickly from the fall of the Goa'uld Empire. Frankly, I'm not surprised the Lucian Alliance appeared. Then again, like Aesop says:

Perhaps the galaxy is too big to police it and prevent a faction like the Lucian Alliance from stepping into the Goa'ulds role, I don't know.

[Flyboy]

(especially considering this seems to be the philosophy the US applies to most of its international engagements - they didn't simply topple Saddam Hussein's government and then leave the Iraqis to fend for themselves).

You do realise half of the problems in Afghanistan and Iraq (from an insurgency perspective) arose from the US (in the case of the former) and the US & her allies (in the case of the latter), not immediately engaging in 'Phase 4' (or 'reconstruction') initiatives immediately? The insurgencies *developed* because a security vacuum did form! That's one of the very things that TPTB were actually referencing with Telford's speech!

[Ripple in Space]

You do realise half of the problems in Afghanistan and Iraq (from an insurgency perspective) arose from the US (in the case of the former) and the US & her allies (in the case of the latter), not immediately engaging in 'Phase 4' (or 'reconstruction') initiatives immediately? The insurgencies *developed* because a security vacuum did form! That's one of the very things that TPTB were actually referencing with Telford's speech!

If that's the case, they don't seem to think that's a valid stance, considering the dialogue is spoken by Telford who was brainwashed by the Lucian Alliance, and slamming Jack, Sam, Daniel, and Teal'c, the "heroes" of the franchise

[Flyboy]

If that's the case, they don't seem to think that's a valid stance, considering the dialogue is spoken by Telford who was brainwashed by the Lucian Alliance, and slamming Jack, Sam, Daniel, and Teal'c, the "heroes" of the franchise

The stance of 'what right' might not be valid, but the fact that such things do occur, and people to then hold such views IS valid...

I was impressed at its reflection of real world dilemmas....

[Pytheas]

You do realise half of the problems in Afghanistan and Iraq (from an insurgency perspective) arose from the US (in the case of the former) and the US & her allies (in the case of the latter), not immediately engaging in 'Phase 4' (or 'reconstruction') initiatives immediately? The insurgencies *developed* because a security vacuum did form! That's one of the very things that TPTB were actually referencing with Telford's speech!

I know... I wasn't trying to make a political point. I was simply saying that of the two basic philosophies I set-up (security or self-determination), the US tends to employ the former. I was using Iraq and Afghanistan as general examples, by saying (irregardless of the specifics of the situation) that because of their prolonged military stay, they believe that security takes precedence. In regards to the specifics of your outburst, I would agree. However, not immediately initiating Phase 4 is a mistake that could be said is isolated to that particular scenario, due to a bad individual decision and is not part of the overall policy.

[Flyboy]

I know... I wasn't trying to make a political point. I was simply saying that of the two basic philosophies I set-up (security or self-determination), the US tends to employ the former. I was using Iraq and Afghanistan as general examples, by saying (irregardless of the specifics of the situation) that because of their prolonged military stay, they believe that security takes precedence. In regards to the specifics of your outburst, I would agree. However, not immediately initiating Phase 4 is a mistake that could be said is isolated to that particular scenario, due to a bad individual decision and is not part of the overall policy.

Outburst? I wouldn't call it that...

I just disagree with your statement that it's part of US policy.

[Pytheas]

Outburst? I wouldn't call it that...

I just disagree with your statement that it's part of US policy.

Sorry, I probably should've been more careful with my wording. Could you clarify: what did I assert was US policy? Erring on the side of providing security over self-determination? That was the point of my post, and I was simply using Afghanistan/Iraq as examples, considering they still maintain a military presence there and have been active in trying to kick-start their respective administrations (whereas self-determination, as is demonstrated in the Stargate series, would suggest a withdrawal as soon as the wars in both countries were over, which is what the US has asserted).

I'll try and reword the last part of my last post so that it's a little clearer. I'm not saying that the timing of Phase 4 in relation to its predecessor is a consistent part of that strategy, I'm saying that it's lateness in Iraq is a delay made by either bad or mistaken judgement. The circumstances of how the insurgencies in those two theatres came about is beside the point. I hope that clears it up.

To clarify: my point throughout this thread has been to assert that in international conflict, the United States - in choosing between the two policies of providing security or self-determination - would opt for the former. This contradicts their attitude to interplanetary conflict in the Stargate series, where they allow the people a heightened level of self-determination.

[Peterking72]

To initial question. We have every right. We are the 5th race, however unprepared or young we are compared to the ancients. I think it was infinitely more beneficial to the galaxy that when the Ori came, the Goa'ulds were defeated. What a mess would have ensued if two races with god complexes crash. The Goa'uld would've fallen no question, then we would've still faced with the Ori, just with less help and allies. Not that any allies was a big help against the Ori. Plus the system lords would've sacrificed every jaffa against the Ori, whereas in the series end there were plenty left to run a successful empire/democracy.

The defeat of Goa'uld reign was a must, we didn't have much choice either.
As to the spirit, humans have plenty.

The Lucian Alliance is just a minor nuisance compared to other enemies, they could never fill the power vacuum. Besides apart from the leaders and their attack force they mostly consist of primitive agrar planets. If we continue to maintain the current speed of technological improvement and always station one or two battle cruisers in orbit I doubt the Lucian Alliance ever pose a serious threat to us.

The SG teams are still discovering new planets every day, so those evil empires will suffer the end the Goa'uld empire suffered.