Who should lead SG1?(Spoilers)

[Adal]

As a major in the army I can say quite confidently that Mitchell is a poor excuse for an officer.

Whilst I understand that many people like his character, I do not understand how anyone can condone his recklessness as an officer. Stronghold is a prime example of why he is not a good officer. He disobeyed orders under fire {Mod Snip} The lives of the people under my command are in my hands and it is my DUTY to keep them as safe as possible. I may have to send them into harms way but I WILL NOT endanger them needlessly because I am in a bad mood. There's nothing wrong with making a break, however the tactics behind making a break is for allowing the rest of your unit to follow and form up. Mitchell never attempted to provide cover and allow an advance. He was specifically ordered to wait for backup and he didn't, he ignored everything and ran off by himself forcing others to run after him and save his butt and THAT is why he is a bad officer because he NEEDLESSLY endangered his comrades while disobeying a direct order.

The writers have done a very poor job last season IMO and having Mitchell's dying friend tell him "You've, you've gotta be a little angry, you've got to be outta control." just proves they know nothing about what an officer needs to be. The more they try to make Mitchell the "Hero" the worse they write him as an officer.

I've followed this thread with interest, I understand that people like or dislike Mitchell for many reasons but there is no way that anyone can tell me that he is a good officer because he is not. Sam Carter is a better and more experienced officer and writing her out of the position and replacing her with Mitchell is a joke. For me I'll have Sam Carter to lead SG-1.

The writers have written the character inconsistently and have given him attributes that should have had him never considered for the SGC let alone lead the flagship team. The writers seem to have regressed and are indulging their childhood fantasy of being a "hero" and took a very big step away from reality. In my experience "heroes" like Mitchell get people killed.

[Uber]

As a major in the army I can say quite confidently that Mitchell is a poor excuse for an officer.

Whilst I understand that many people like his character, I do not understand how anyone can condone his recklessness as an officer. Stronghold is a prime example of why he is not a good officer. He disobeyed orders under fire {Mod Snip} The lives of the people under my command are in my hands and it is my DUTY to keep them as safe as possible. I may have to send them into harms way but I WILL NOT endanger them needlessly because I am in a bad mood. There's nothing wrong with making a break, however the tactics behind making a break is for allowing the rest of your unit to follow and form up. Mitchell never attempted to provide cover and allow an advance. He was specifically ordered to wait for backup and he didn't, he ignored everything and ran off by himself forcing others to run after him and save his butt and THAT is why he is a bad officer because he NEEDLESSLY endangered his comrades while disobeying a direct order.

The writers have done a very poor job last season IMO and having Mitchell's dying friend tell him "You've, you've gotta be a little angry, you've got to be outta control." just proves they know nothing about what an officer needs to be. The more they try to make Mitchell the "Hero" the worse they write him as an officer.

I've followed this thread with interest, I understand that people like or dislike Mitchell for many reasons but there is no way that anyone can tell me that he is a good officer because he is not. Sam Carter is a better and more experienced officer and writing her out of the position and replacing her with Mitchell is a joke. For me I'll have Sam Carter to lead SG-1.

The writers have written the character inconsistently and have given him attributes that should have had him never considered for the SGC let alone lead the flagship team. The writers seem to have regressed and are indulging their childhood fantasy of being a "hero" and took a very big step away from reality. In my experience "heroes" like Mitchell get people killed.

Wow. Thank you, Major, for your input. Are you still active duty or retired? I assume it's appropriate to address you by rank even if you're retired, right?

I'd be interested in your take on the Congressional Medal of Honor controversy and also to the debate as to whether or not Lt. Colonel Carter could be promoted.

[ReganX]

As a major in the army I can say quite confidently that Mitchell is a poor excuse for an officer.

Whilst I understand that many people like his character, I do not understand how anyone can condone his recklessness as an officer. Stronghold is a prime example of why he is not a good officer. He disobeyed orders under fire {Mod Snip} The lives of the people under my command are in my hands and it is my DUTY to keep them as safe as possible. I may have to send them into harms way but I WILL NOT endanger them needlessly because I am in a bad mood. There's nothing wrong with making a break, however the tactics behind making a break is for allowing the rest of your unit to follow and form up. Mitchell never attempted to provide cover and allow an advance. He was specifically ordered to wait for backup and he didn't, he ignored everything and ran off by himself forcing others to run after him and save his butt and THAT is why he is a bad officer because he NEEDLESSLY endangered his comrades while disobeying a direct order.

The writers have done a very poor job last season IMO and having Mitchell's dying friend tell him "You've, you've gotta be a little angry, you've got to be outta control." just proves they know nothing about what an officer needs to be. The more they try to make Mitchell the "Hero" the worse they write him as an officer.

I've followed this thread with interest, I understand that people like or dislike Mitchell for many reasons but there is no way that anyone can tell me that he is a good officer because he is not. Sam Carter is a better and more experienced officer and writing her out of the position and replacing her with Mitchell is a joke. For me I'll have Sam Carter to lead SG-1.

The writers have written the character inconsistently and have given him attributes that should have had him never considered for the SGC let alone lead the flagship team. The writers seem to have regressed and are indulging their childhood fantasy of being a "hero" and took a very big step away from reality. In my experience "heroes" like Mitchell get people killed.

Thank you, Major. It's great to get the opinion of a military officer on Mitchell.

Out of curiousity, what would happen in real life if an officer did what Mitchell did in 'Stronghold'?

I'd be interested in your take on the Congressional Medal of Honor controversy and also to the debate as to whether or not Lt. Colonel Carter could be promoted.

So would I.

[Lokii]

As a major in the army I can say quite confidently that Mitchell is a poor excuse for an officer.

Whilst I understand that many people like his character, I do not understand how anyone can condone his recklessness as an officer. Stronghold is a prime example of why he is not a good officer. He disobeyed orders under fire {Mod Snip}The lives of the people under my command are in my hands and it is my DUTY to keep them as safe as possible. I may have to send them into harms way but I WILL NOT endanger them needlessly because I am in a bad mood. There's nothing wrong with making a break, however the tactics behind making a break is for allowing the rest of your unit to follow and form up. Mitchell never attempted to provide cover and allow an advance. He was specifically ordered to wait for backup and he didn't, he ignored everything and ran off by himself forcing others to run after him and save his butt and THAT is why he is a bad officer because he NEEDLESSLY endangered his comrades while disobeying a direct order.

The writers have done a very poor job last season IMO and having Mitchell's dying friend tell him "You've, you've gotta be a little angry, you've got to be outta control." just proves they know nothing about what an officer needs to be. The more they try to make Mitchell the "Hero" the worse they write him as an officer.

I've followed this thread with interest, I understand that people like or dislike Mitchell for many reasons but there is no way that anyone can tell me that he is a good officer because he is not. Sam Carter is a better and more experienced officer and writing her out of the position and replacing her with Mitchell is a joke. For me I'll have Sam Carter to lead SG-1.

The writers have written the character inconsistently and have given him attributes that should have had him never considered for the SGC let alone lead the flagship team. The writers seem to have regressed and are indulging their childhood fantasy of being a "hero" and took a very big step away from reality. In my experience "heroes" like Mitchell get people killed.

As a fromer member of ht US armed forces I strongly agree. Mitchell is even a poor excuse for a military officer for TV land.

[ParadoxRealities]

First--

Spoiler:

if the incident with Ferguson was truly Mitchell's fault, due to his rash actions, wouldn't that be reflected in his record? Landry's words in Avalon wouldn't have been uttered:

You would think someone who is in some way responsible for another's very serious injury wouldn't have an "impeccable" service record.

i don't think it had to looked like his

Spoiler:

"rash" actions hurt Ferguson

the first time. yes, he made a bad call, he took a bad risk, but it could have looked like (and very likely have been) a mistake, which would not have to be reflected in his record.

Second, it seems like over the years, they have done lots of things alone. For example: The First Commandment, There But For the Grace of God, The Serpent's Lair, Need, The Fifth Race, The Devil You Know, A Hundred Days, Maternal Instinct, The Tomb (gak!), Descent, Nightwalkers...sorry, run out of time to check any more seasons. Anyway, I know there's reasons for each situation and they are not identical to Stronghold, but my point is they DO do things on their own--alone (sometimes against orders or common sense).

yes, they've all made mistakes. only a few in combat, much fewer against orders in combat, very very few endangering their team against orders in combat, and nil endangering their team against orders in combat drastically against common sense. i know it sounds picky, but none really come close.

Third, I just don't believe you can account for every eventuality. Sure, Mitchell (or Sam or Daniel) should have thought of the 100's of things that go wrong, but that's just not realistic. They'd be in the planning stages for weeks (exaggeration, I know) before doing anything.

oh gosh, no! not EVERY possibility! but the best way to severely decrease that number? don't go ALONE, especially when you've NEVER been on a mothership. that's what you're team's for. (as evidenced by sam and daniel taking out the jaffa, and sam getting the rings working).

Finally, regarding your second paragraph, I'm sure in the real world, that scenario is best and proper and normal; but in a one hour (42 minute) TV show, it seems a bit unwieldy. I'm not sure how much of that they've shown in other episodes, but my memory is admittedly poor.

not sure what you're referring to? not showing rings breaking in other eps? please elaborate.


welcome Major, good to have you with us. strongly agree and well said. good to know you agree with what i've been saying. (maybe it'll get more attention now?)

[Lightsabre]

As a major in the army I can say quite confidently that Mitchell is a poor excuse for an officer.

Whilst I understand that many people like his character, I do not understand how anyone can condone his recklessness as an officer. Stronghold is a prime example of why he is not a good officer. He disobeyed orders under fire {Mod Snip} The lives of the people under my command are in my hands and it is my DUTY to keep them as safe as possible. I may have to send them into harms way but I WILL NOT endanger them needlessly because I am in a bad mood. There's nothing wrong with making a break, however the tactics behind making a break is for allowing the rest of your unit to follow and form up. Mitchell never attempted to provide cover and allow an advance. He was specifically ordered to wait for backup and he didn't, he ignored everything and ran off by himself forcing others to run after him and save his butt and THAT is why he is a bad officer because he NEEDLESSLY endangered his comrades while disobeying a direct order.

The writers have done a very poor job last season IMO and having Mitchell's dying friend tell him "You've, you've gotta be a little angry, you've got to be outta control." just proves they know nothing about what an officer needs to be. The more they try to make Mitchell the "Hero" the worse they write him as an officer.

I've followed this thread with interest, I understand that people like or dislike Mitchell for many reasons but there is no way that anyone can tell me that he is a good officer because he is not. Sam Carter is a better and more experienced officer and writing her out of the position and replacing her with Mitchell is a joke. For me I'll have Sam Carter to lead SG-1.

The writers have written the character inconsistently and have given him attributes that should have had him never considered for the SGC let alone lead the flagship team. The writers seem to have regressed and are indulging their childhood fantasy of being a "hero" and took a very big step away from reality. In my experience "heroes" like Mitchell get people killed.

Thanks for your input adal. I know you are speaking from a experienced, one might even say expert, viewpoint.
However, I feel compelled to point out that this is NOT real life. It's a fantasy and a tv show.
The writers will put things in there that wouldn't be done in real life, cause they make good tv.
Trying to evaluate from a real life perspective will not work, because they've all, many times over, committed many many court martialable offences.
YOu can't condemn one without condemning them all.

[ParadoxRealities]

Thanks for your input adal. I know you are speaking from a experienced, one might even say expert, viewpoint.
However, I feel compelled to point out that this is NOT real life. It's a fantasy and a tv show.
The writers will put things in there that wouldn't be done in real life, cause they make good tv.
Trying to evaluate from a real life perspective will not work, because they've all, many times over, committed many many court martialable offences.
YOu can't condemn one without condemning them all.

true. stargate's never been one to adhere completely to the military. however, sam and jack are good officers; mitchell is not. that, RL or not, should not and cannot be ignored (IMand-manyO). this is evidenced in the many criticisms of this season (much more than previous), and mitchell in particular, from people in and attached to the armed forces of many different countries. including, i believe, the AF correspondent on set. some people don't care, and that's their prerogative, but i don't agree that "you can't condemn one without condemning them all", because mitchell is, quite frankly, in many of those condemners eyes, much worse.

[Adal]

Wow. Thank you, Major, for your input. Are you still active duty or retired? I assume it's appropriate to address you by rank even if you're retired, right?

I'd be interested in your take on the Congressional Medal of Honor controversy and also to the debate as to whether or not Lt. Colonel Carter could be promoted.

Recently retired, so no adressing me by rank isn't appropriate.

Medal of Honor. No way does Mitchell qualify for that rare honor for his participation in the events in Antarctica. All the previous arguments against him getting it I have read here are pretty valid. You have to do something extraordinaryly brave that noone could reasonably expect you to do. In the eyes of the brass his job was to protect SG-1 at all costs, so doing his job is not reason enough to get that honor, they will use any excuse not to award that honor and this is the most obvious reason. The other reasons would be that other pilots were doing exactly what Mitchell was doing; SG-1 saves the earth again and they award the MoH to a pilot shot down and not SG-1?

Promoting Lt Col Carter. It's possible but it would depend on a few things. Starting with how many points she has racked up and when she was actually put up for promotion to Lt Col. These things take time so I am assuming the events of Lost City and New order took place after the promotions board sat so these events would count favorably towards promotion. Add in the events of Threads and this is another consolidation in reasons for promotion. If you saved the Earth and your intergalactic allies on multiple occasions don't you think that would help with promotions, if you can get the MoH simply for doing what others are doing then saving the Earth/Galaxy should count a lot more right?

Promotions at high levels are tricky and political, you need to be seen to do the "right" things and rack up the points and have favorable backing from the brass. As for events in Season 9? Well they gave her command of R&D at Area 51 which would be a large command so I'm having trouble with picturing what exactly her current position at the SGC is. Lt Col Carter was needed to "save the world" again and brought back to the SGC so I can't see the brass taking two commands off her and reassigning her to SG-1 thereby killing her career. Assigning her to the SGC in a suitably high position with command responsibility and "attaching" her to SG-1 as needed - yes I can see that.

If in Season 10 when they supposedly clear up the "command issue" if they have Lt Col Carter in a non command position then I think that it just proves that the writers are {Mod Snip}

Out of curiousity, what would happen in real life if an officer did what Mitchell did in 'Stronghold'?

That would depend on how it was reported. He could have gotten as little as a reprimand or it could have been made into a courts-martial offence. It really depends on whether those in command are on your side or not and whether outside influences have an axe to grind.

First let me say that I see that episode as a poor excuse to make Mitchell a hero. Second let's look at what Mitchell actually did.

First he left highly classified equipment unattended. Equipment / documents etc of this nature are released into the custody of suitably cleared personnel. The equipment was left in his custody and he left it unattended and unsecured in the hands of a non cleared person - that's a definite black mark. Now before people go repeating old arguments that the facility was classified, the answer is so what!! The facility can't protect the equipment from being stolen or abused, people do that. You may have security clearance to work in the building but that does not mean you have clearance to see / know / look after certain classified things. It was Mitchell's responsibility to look after that equipment and he did not - end of story - black mark. Actually he shouldn't have gotten permission for his non security cleared friend to see it in the first place.

Second and this is not aimed at Mitchell but the General. Mitchell obviously hadn't attended the briefing and so he shouldn't have been allowed on the mission.

Third that whole battle was a joke staged to make Mitchell look like a hero (to those who do not know better). What happened to the previously well stage battles of yesteryear? So we have Mitchell run unhurt through the biggest kill zone I have ever seen!! He gets to the top and gets to do heroic hand to hand combat with a single Jaffa!! Yeah right, what happened to the other Jaffa up there? Did Mitchell just get lucky and get the weakest ever Jaffa to take on?? Now having heroically survived the kill zone run, hand to hand combat and blowing the Jaffa cannon emplacement to smithereens he runs off by himself. [/sarcasm] No attempt at communicating with anyone, no attempt at providing cover to allow an advance and no attempt to acknowledge or follow the order to wait for back up.

Fourth since when do Jaffa in battle seek surrender of the enemy? Mitchell would have been shot in the back as he tried to ring up to the mothership. Jaffa wouldn't hesitate to protect their god from a direct assault. But having survived beacuse of the heroic plot points he gets to go up to the mothership alone?? I don't think so, how does someone unfamiliar with motherships know where to go and how to avoid security?? Shouldn't that go to the experienced people?? Oh no, if you do that then Mithchell isn't the hero. [/sarcasm]

Sorry for the sarcasm, I just can't see how anyone accepts garbage like this when in previous seasons we got so much more quality, sometimes I think I am seeing a comicbook brought to life.

welcome Major, good to have you with us. strongly agree and well said. good to know you agree with what i've been saying. (maybe it'll get more attention now?)

Thanks for the welcome. It's taken me a while to decide to join this thread {Mod Snip}and the military brats & co have been doing a great job in here. I wish some of those under my command showed such a sense of honor and intelligence.

Will it get more attention now? Probably not. The argument will probably switch to "but it's not real life", totally discounting previous arguments made for Mitchell based on reality and discounting that previously the series did a good job of presenting O'Neill, Carter and Hammond as good officers and then in Season 9 they do an about face and give us this poor excuse for an officer called Mitchell.

[Uber]

Recently retired, so no adressing me by rank isn't appropriate.

Medal of Honor. No way does Mitchell qualify for that rare honor for his participation in the events in Antarctica. All the previous arguments against him getting it I have read here are pretty valid. You have to do something extraordinaryly brave that noone could reasonably expect you to do. In the eyes of the brass his job was to protect SG-1 at all costs, so doing his job is not reason enough to get that honor, they will use any excuse not to award that honor and this is the most obvious reason. The other reasons would be that other pilots were doing exactly what Mitchell was doing; SG-1 saves the earth again and they award the MoH to a pilot shot down and not SG-1?

Promoting Lt Col Carter. It's possible but it would depend on a few things. Starting with how many points she has racked up and when she was actually put up for promotion to Lt Col. These things take time so I am assuming the events of Lost City and New order took place after the promotions board sat so these events would count favorably towards promotion. Add in the events of Threads and this is another consolidation in reasons for promotion. If you saved the Earth and your intergalactic allies on multiple occasions don't you think that would help with promotions, if you can get the MoH simply for doing what others are doing then saving the Earth/Galaxy should count a lot more right?

Promotions at high levels are tricky and political, you need to be seen to do the "right" things and rack up the points and have favorable backing from the brass. As for events in Season 9? Well they gave her command of R&D at Area 51 which would be a large command so I'm having trouble with picturing what exactly her current position at the SGC is. Lt Col Carter was needed to "save the world" again and brought back to the SGC so I can't see the brass taking two commands off her and reassigning her to SG-1 thereby killing her career. Assigning her to the SGC in a suitably high position with command responsibility and "attaching" her to SG-1 as needed - yes I can see that.

If in Season 10 when they supposedly clear up the "command issue" if they have Lt Col Carter in a non command position then I think that it just proves that the writers are {Mod Snip}
That would depend on how it was reported. He could have gotten as little as a reprimand or it could have been made into a courts-martial offence. It really depends on whether those in command are on your side or not and whether outside influences have an axe to grind.

First let me say that I see that episode as a poor excuse to make Mitchell a hero. Second let's look at what Mitchell actually did.

First he left highly classified equipment unattended. Equipment / documents etc of this nature are released into the custody of suitably cleared personnel. The equipment was left in his custody and he left it unattended and unsecured in the hands of a non cleared person - that's a definite black mark. Now before people go repeating old arguments that the facility was classified, the answer is so what!! The facility can't protect the equipment from being stolen or abused, people do that. You may have security clearance to work in the building but that does not mean you have clearance to see / know / look after certain classified things. It was Mitchell's responsibility to look after that equipment and he did not - end of story - black mark. Actually he shouldn't have gotten permission for his non security cleared friend to see it in the first place.

Second and this is not aimed at Mitchell but the General. Mitchell obviously hadn't attended the briefing and so he shouldn't have been allowed on the mission.

Third that whole battle was a joke staged to make Mitchell look like a hero (to those who do not know better). What happened to the previously well stage battles of yesteryear? So we have Mitchell run unhurt through the biggest kill zone I have ever seen!! He gets to the top and gets to do heroic hand to hand combat with a single Jaffa!! Yeah right, what happened to the other Jaffa up there? Did Mitchell just get lucky and get the weakest ever Jaffa to take on?? Now having heroically survived the kill zone run, hand to hand combat and blowing the Jaffa cannon emplacement to smithereens he runs off by himself. [/sarcasm] No attempt at communicating with anyone, no attempt at providing cover to allow an advance and no attempt to acknowledge or follow the order to wait for back up.

Fourth since when do Jaffa in battle seek surrender of the enemy? Mitchell would have been shot in the back as he tried to ring up to the mothership. Jaffa wouldn't hesitate to protect their god from a direct assault. But having survived beacuse of the heroic plot points he gets to go up to the mothership alone?? I don't think so, how does someone unfamiliar with motherships know where to go and how to avoid security?? Shouldn't that go to the experienced people?? Oh no, if you do that then Mithchell isn't the hero. [/sarcasm]

Sorry for the sarcasm, I just can't see how anyone accepts garbage like this when in previous seasons we got so much more quality, sometimes I think I am seeing a comicbook brought to life.

Thanks for the welcome. It's taken me a while to decide to join this thread {Mod Snip}and the military brats & co have been doing a great job in here. I wish some of those under my command showed such a sense of honor and intelligence.

Will it get more attention now? Probably not. The argument will probably switch to "but it's not real life", totally discounting previous arguments made for Mitchell based on reality and discounting that previously the series did a good job of presenting O'Neill, Carter and Hammond as good officers and then in Season 9 they do an about face and give us this poor excuse for an officer called Mitchell.

So then, Major, your position on Mitchell's competence and leadership skills is a "maybe", right?



Sorry...just trying to be funny. "TRYING" being the operative word.

[Mandysg1]

Wow Adal you've made 2 wonderful posts I salute you
I think people forget that SG1 takes place in our time period, not in the future like Star Trek, so these characters have to follow the rules of the military people they portray. Which is why in the earlier seasons they had a military advisor that they actually listened to, to make the characters believable. That's what I liked about SG1, sure they were fighting aliens, but they could also be your next door neighbour.

I'm sorry to say with S9 the military advisor was probably fired or locked in a closet, because TPTB sure didn't listen to them when they wrote for Mitchell. He comes off as the type of officer to get those around him killed, and he never gets called on it Pity, SG1 used to be a show that had quality, I don't even recognize it anymore.

[Madeleine]

The thread took a break while mods looked at it; and the inflammatory remarks are now snipped.

Any questions should be taken to PM.

Thanks.

[scarimor]

Thanks for the welcome. It's taken me a while to decide to join this thread and the military brats & co have been doing a great job in here. I wish some of those under my command showed such a sense of honor and intelligence.

Will it get more attention now? Probably not. The argument will probably switch to "but it's not real life", totally discounting previous arguments made for Mitchell based on reality and discounting that previously the series did a good job of presenting O'Neill, Carter and Hammond as good officers and then in Season 9 they do an about face and give us this poor excuse for an officer called Mitchell.

The "but it's not real life" argument in favour of the poor writing is a non-starter. A story must not break the rules of its own diegesis. An essential part of Stargate's diegesis, right from the start, is that it is set in our present world around the real and current United States Air Force. The suspension of disbelief required to enter the Stargate world must be within those parameters.

The manner of Cameron's introduction and his subsequent characterisation breaks that suspension of disbelief - not only for viewers who have familiarity with military organizations, but many who have none. That is a measure of bad story-telling. There really is no simpler nor more accurate description: bad story-telling. It is just inadequate workmanship.

Essentially, the writers have mis-matched characterization with role severely. It is a fundamental error for which an amateur should be ashamed. Speculating here - we don't know whether the role for Cameron's character was foisted upon the writers by exec pressure; it may be that the suits insisted upon a new white male lead for the show, and insisted that the lead role must be in a leading position on SG-1; and that the co-command was the writers' attempt to force that square peg in the round hole that was eight years of continuity to date. Yet even if that were so (and it may not have been - it may have been all their own idea), I very much doubt that the suits directed Cameron's characterization too.

The writers are responsible for that crucial mis-match. They wrote Cameron as impatient and "a little angry" and "a little out of control", and repeatedly use that as a plot device. You know there's something wrong when inexplicable weirdness or sheer coincidence has to make the plot work: e.g. why did the enemy Jaffa not shoot Cameron on the battlefield in Stronghold? And what astonishing luck that a split second beam-out saved SG-1 from an ignominious drugs gang shooting in Off the Grid.

Very shoddy.

[minigeek]

As a major in the army I can say quite confidently that Mitchell is a poor excuse for an officer. {...} The more they try to make Mitchell the "Hero" the worse they write him as an officer. {...} In my experience "heroes" like Mitchell get people killed.

Wow. Can't give you a standing ovation for this post, Adal, but thank you so much for coming forward and speaking up. A particularily pertinent post.

minigeek

[ReganX]

Medal of Honor. No way does Mitchell qualify for that rare honor for his participation in the events in Antarctica. All the previous arguments against him getting it I have read here are pretty valid. You have to do something extraordinaryly brave that noone could reasonably expect you to do. In the eyes of the brass his job was to protect SG-1 at all costs, so doing his job is not reason enough to get that honor, they will use any excuse not to award that honor and this is the most obvious reason. The other reasons would be that other pilots were doing exactly what Mitchell was doing; SG-1 saves the earth again and they award the MoH to a pilot shot down and not SG-1?

Mitchell getting the Congressional Medal of Honor never made sense to me, except as a plot device.

Promoting Lt Col Carter. It's possible but it would depend on a few things. Starting with how many points she has racked up and when she was actually put up for promotion to Lt Col. These things take time so I am assuming the events of Lost City and New order took place after the promotions board sat so these events would count favorably towards promotion. Add in the events of Threads and this is another consolidation in reasons for promotion. If you saved the Earth and your intergalactic allies on multiple occasions don't you think that would help with promotions, if you can get the MoH simply for doing what others are doing then saving the Earth/Galaxy should count a lot more right?

Sam, Jacob and Ba'al (helped a timely distraction from Daniel) saved the whole galaxy when they took out the Replicators in "The Reckoning, Part 2". That could help Sam's case as far as promotion goes.

Assigning her to the SGC in a suitably high position with command responsibility and "attaching" her to SG-1 as needed - yes I can see that.

That would make sense.

That would depend on how it was reported. He could have gotten as little as a reprimand or it could have been made into a courts-martial offence. It really depends on whether those in command are on your side or not and whether outside influences have an axe to grind.

Thanks. Landry seems to like Mitchell, so that must be why he wasn't court martialled.

First he left highly classified equipment unattended. Equipment / documents etc of this nature are released into the custody of suitably cleared personnel. The equipment was left in his custody and he left it unattended and unsecured in the hands of a non cleared person - that's a definite black mark. Now before people go repeating old arguments that the facility was classified, the answer is so what!! The facility can't protect the equipment from being stolen or abused, people do that. You may have security clearance to work in the building but that does not mean you have clearance to see / know / look after certain classified things. It was Mitchell's responsibility to look after that equipment and he did not - end of story - black mark. Actually he shouldn't have gotten permission for his non security cleared friend to see it in the first place.

What I never understood was why Mitchell was allowed to share his memories of classified material with Ferguson. The Stargate Program is supposed to be a secret, or at least it was the last time I checked. Ferguson did not need to know about it, he was not in a position to offer them any kind of assistance, as Jacob was, and hadn't seen anything the way Pete had. I fail to see why Mitchell's guilt was reason enough to allow somebody access to highly confidential information and alien equipment, without even having them sign a confidentiality agreement or ensuring that the equipment was under supervision at all times.

It would have made more sense if Mitchell had taken the device and shared his memories without permission.

[Lightsabre]

The "but it's not real life" argument in favour of the poor writing is a non-starter. A story must not break the rules of its own diegesis. An essential part of Stargate's diegesis, right from the start, is that it is set in our present world around the real and current United States Air Force. The suspension of disbelief required to enter the Stargate world must be within those parameters.

Sorry, but I've pointed out 2 instances in S1 where Carter disobeyed a direct order from a superior and put her own life, and the life of her team mates in jeporady.
O'Neill stole a child from the SGC, in defiance of orders and nearly caused in intergalactic incident AND lost major tech for Earth.
Yet despite these major infractions, no disciplanry action was ever taken and they are hailed as hero's.
Taking adal's post into account, they should never have made it to S2, let alone S8.
I might point out the same ppl that are hailing his post as 'pertinant' and 'relevant' are the same ones who excused those actions on Carter and Jack's behalf.

The manner of Cameron's introduction and his subsequent characterisation breaks that suspension of disbelief - not only for viewers who have familiarity with military organizations, but many who have none. That is a measure of bad story-telling. There really is no simpler nor more accurate description: bad story-telling. It is just inadequate workmanship.

I disagree here. THe military DOES put inexperienced officers in charge of operations.
You yourself provided a post on 'fragging', so I know you are aware of it.
It doesn't violate the suspension of disbelief.

[
Essentially, the writers have mis-matched characterization with role severely. It is a fundamental error for which an amateur should be ashamed. Speculating here - we don't know whether the role for Cameron's character was foisted upon the writers by exec pressure; it may be that the suits insisted upon a new white male lead for the show, and insisted that the lead role must be in a leading position on SG-1; and that the co-command was the writers' attempt to force that square peg in the round hole that was eight years of continuity to date. Yet even if that were so (and it may not have been - it may have been all their own idea), I very much doubt that the suits directed Cameron's characterization too.

Again, I disagree. I think its more that all of the writers have a different vision of Cam and how he fits in, and they haven't attempted to align their views, so he comes across fragmented.

[
The writers are responsible for that crucial mis-match. They wrote Cameron as impatient and "a little angry" and "a little out of control", and repeatedly use that as a plot device. You know there's something wrong when inexplicable weirdness or sheer coincidence has to make the plot work: e.g. why did the enemy Jaffa not shoot Cameron on the battlefield in Stronghold? And what astonishing luck that a split second beam-out saved SG-1 from an ignominious drugs gang shooting in Off the Grid.

Very shoddy.

THere have been plot problems with a lot of S9. however, that exonerates Cameron, not condemns him.