Who should lead SG1?(Spoilers)

[the dancer of spaz]

SHe has the right to call him by name, but she cannot TELL him what she will do if he is leading the mission. YOu state that he needs to obey her in 'Stronghold' when she is lead, therefore she must have to obey him when HE is lead.

When is he leading? Are you still talking about Prototype? Because, to be honest, after Cameron's plot device behavior (just like in Gemini, imo) took a turn for the worst, I was completely disregarding his one (of seven) "SG-Leader" assertions.

Sam led SG-5 prior to their trip to the planet with SG-1, iirc. She was sent BACK with SG-5 to lead their scientific investigation. It's my understanding that she was in charge of SG-5, but was also part of SG-1.

You said earlier that Sam should've deferred to Cameron before ordering her team to carry out their half of the mission. However, I suggest that, even IF Cameron was the sole leader of that mission (which I'm still iffy about; maybe I'm in denial - whatever), Sam should have only had to defer to him while in combat. They weren't in combat. Sam was most definitely in charge of the science aspect of that mission, with the help of SG-5. It wasn't Cam's "jurisdiction" so to speak, because she'd been leading them the whole time.

Again, Cam was never shown as part of the group that Carter led. While it might be understood he was under her command, it's never DIRECTLY STATED in the ep.

Cameron was shown having contact with Landry and Sam before the mission. Landry specifically told Cameron that Sam was leading the mission. And when Sam came to the hospital, she mentioned when they were scheduled to leave. If TPTB had wanted that to be ambiguous, they would NOT have had Landry say that. Cameron is not some lone wolf, who can be attached to whatever mission he so chooses solely because he's THAT GOOD. That's just not how this show has worked. There's absolutely no reason why it should start now. Cameron is not above the rest of the SGC, no matter how much TPTB like to pretend he is.

Like there were no reprecussions for 'Gemini'.

Gemini was just one big plot device. I'm sorry. There are wholly sound and reasonable justifications behind Sam's, Jack's and Teal'c's actions (with which I do agree to some extent, I admit). However, when you get right down to it, TPTB needed an easy way to get RepliCarter to the Alpha base so they could continue that arc for Reckoning/Threads. Plain and simple.

I wish Jack and Teal'c hadn't tried so hard to cheer Sam up in the way that they did at the end, because all three of them DID screw up. And again, while the reasons BEHIND their screw up are understandable in my book, it didn't negate the damage.

By the time Reckoning rolled around, I don't think I would've been so opposed to SOME sort of verbal fallout over, or statement about, what happened.

How so? Cam screwed up once. SG-1 commits court martialable offences all the time.

When? Where? Gemini was a mistake; not court-martialable. The last time SG-1 committed a court-martialable offense, they were under the influence of alien technology. Five years ago.

Mitchell's behavior in the field was not only court-martialable, but a clear and deliberate slap in Carter's face. Without saying a word, Cameron undermined her authority in the most demeaning of ways. And you think no one else was on the radio when Sam shouted that order, or watched Cameron continue on his one man task? But we're supposed to completely overlook that because Cameron, being the hero, was a man on a mission aimed at saving Teal'c at all costs, as some form of atonement for his mistakes with Ferguson. Forget about the fact that, realistically, Sam, Daniel, Cameron and Teal'c should have been obliterated by Jaffa.

And saying, "Well THEY'VE done it, so he should be able to do it" makes NO sense. Daniel, Sam and Teal'c have nine years of experience behind them. Cameron barely has a year. The fact that he's still able to lead these three into potentially deadly situations is laughable.

[Lightsabre]

You're absoultly right, it is the job of his CO. But I happen to believe Mitchell was not in enough emotional destress to be taken off such and imprtant mission. I believe that Landry was right in putting him there, and that any offcier of his (supposed) caliber could have handled it.

You are forgetting that he was on leave and came back. He wasn't on the original roster, Sam offered him a spot and he said he'd think about it.
When he turned up, the least one of them could have done was pull him aside and make sure his head was in the game.

Yes, and I wasn't trying to address court marshal, I was trying to address that Mitchell made a very bad mistake.

I agree he made a mistake, I was just pointing out that SG-1 do make very bad mistakes. 'Gemini' and 'Menace' for two.

Maybe Sam wasn't operating in military capacity. But, Lee did follow her order once. Military/civilian relations are quite odd (trust me CAP's the not-so-happy medium between them. Though it is much more military in protocol.) The way I see it, Dr. Lee listened to Sam once because she was in charge of that aspect of the mission.

See, I see it differently. I see Lee deffering to her cuase he KNOWS she's smarter, NOT cause she's in charge. If she was, I doubt he'd have mouthed off like he did.

This is a combat mission, Cam was going into combat. There is no way around him being under her command. How would you like to lead a group into combat and suddenly you need to order something but there's some arrogant idiot of your same rank (I am NOT saying Cam is an arrogant idiot, I'm saying that the protocal needs to take these people into account) and he won't follow your order because supposedly he's not under yuor command. The leader of a combat mission is the leader of EVERYONE on it. It's too dangerous otherwise.

I agree with you. It's way too dangerous. Just like it's way too dangerous to have two nominal leads in combat, but SG-1 has that.

[Lightsabre]

When is he leading? Are you still talking about Prototype? Because, to be honest, after Cameron's plot device behavior (just like in Gemini, imo) took a turn for the worst, I was completely disregarding his one (of seven) "SG-Leader" assertions.

Whatever. Think what you like. I'm sick and tired of stating over and over why I think he was leader in that mission. If you don't, fine.
I'm not debating anymore, it just goes in circles.
However, my arguments on the ep will be with the assumption he is lead.
If you wish to debate me on that, please also argue from the same position.

Sam led SG-5 prior to their trip to the planet with SG-1, iirc. She was sent BACK with SG-5 to lead their scientific investigation. It's my understanding that she was in charge of SG-5, but was also part of SG-1.

Thus meaning Mitchell was her CO

You said earlier that Sam should've deferred to Cameron before ordering her team to carry out their half of the mission. However, I suggest that, even IF Cameron was the sole leader of that mission (which I'm still iffy about; maybe I'm in denial - whatever), Sam should have only had to defer to him while in combat. They weren't in combat. Sam was most definitely in charge of the science aspect of that mission, with the help of SG-5. It wasn't Cam's "jurisdiction" so to speak, because she'd been leading them the whole time.

I disagree here. Cam was not in charge just during combat, but for the whole mission. Sam ordering SG-5 around, I can maybe see. But the way she talks to Mitchell is, in my opinion, unacceptable.

Cameron was shown having contact with Landry and Sam before the mission. Landry specifically told Cameron that Sam was leading the mission. And when Sam came to the hospital, she mentioned when they were scheduled to leave. If TPTB had wanted that to be ambiguous, they would NOT have had Landry say that. Cameron is not some lone wolf, who can be attached to whatever mission he so chooses solely because he's THAT GOOD. That's just not how this show has worked. There's absolutely no reason why it should start now. Cameron is not above the rest of the SGC, no matter how much TPTB like to pretend he is.

I never said he did or was. Simply that he was on leave, then back. It could have been he didn't fall under her command for the mission is all.

Gemini was just one big plot device. I'm sorry. There are wholly sound and reasonable justifications behind Sam's, Jack's and Teal'c's actions (with which I do agree to some extent, I admit). However, when you get right down to it, TPTB needed an easy way to get RepliCarter to the Alpha base so they could continue that arc for Reckoning/Threads. Plain and simple.

I wish Jack and Teal'c hadn't tried so hard to cheer Sam up in the way that they did at the end, because all three of them DID screw up. And again, while the reasons BEHIND their screw up are understandable in my book, it didn't negate the damage.

By the time Reckoning rolled around, I don't think I would've been so opposed to SOME sort of verbal fallout over, or statement about, what happened.

None of this refutes my point that there were no reprecussions from the happenings of that episode which was a major screw up.
Or from 'Menace' where Jack shot Reece. Or 'The Other Side' where they lost access to the alien technology.
Why should reprecussions start with Mitchell?
Apparently cause some ppl just don't like him.

When? Where? Gemini was a mistake; not court-martialable. The last time SG-1 committed a court-martialable offense, they were under the influence of alien technology. Five years ago.

What? you think giving an enemy a way to neutralise our only weapon against them in a time of war is not a gross deriliction I duty?
I do.
The fact is SG-1 and esp Jack have multiple times committed court martialable offences and gotten away with it.

Mitchell's behavior in the field was not only court-martialable, but a clear and deliberate slap in Carter's face. Without saying a word, Cameron undermined her authority in the most demeaning of ways. And you think no one else was on the radio when Sam shouted that order, or watched Cameron continue on his one man task? But we're supposed to completely overlook that because Cameron, being the hero, was a man on a mission aimed at saving Teal'c at all costs, as some form of atonement for his mistakes with Ferguson. Forget about the fact that, realistically, Sam, Daniel, Cameron and Teal'c should have been obliterated by Jaffa.

Hmm, really? You think? Kinda like when Sam refused to obey Jack's order in 'The First Commandment'? In front of both Daniel, Teal'c and a liutenant from another SG team?
Don't notice anyone complaining about that one.

And saying, "Well THEY'VE done it, so he should be able to do it" makes NO sense. Daniel, Sam and Teal'c have nine years of experience behind them. Cameron barely has a year. The fact that he's still able to lead these three into potentially deadly situations is laughable.

They had barely a year when they committed the first one.
And yes, if you let SG-1 off, then you have to let Mitchell off. It's that simple.

[Lightsabre]

You still don't get it do you?

No, probably not. I will be the first to admit I"m not military

Basically, we've never seen what you describe, or rather I can't remember another ep where we do.
It's always been one person in command and that's it.
If there are some other eps, please let me know.
(Note:I'm not saying your wrong, only that I cannot remember seeing it on teh show and I want some more evidence before I agree.)

[ParadoxRealities]

You are forgetting that he was on leave and came back. He wasn't on the original roster, Sam offered him a spot and he said he'd think about it.
When he turned up, the least one of them could have done was pull him aside and make sure his head was in the game.

I was my impression that he told Landry he was coming. He kinda had to, pretty bad to randomly walk into the end of a pre-combat mission without being cleared.
And I stand by the fact that any colonel worth his salt wouldn't NEED to be asked, they wouldn't have showed up unless they couldn't handle it, and they'd watch thier own actions to make sure they were ok. Plus, I think that exchange of looks covered what needed to be from the stand point of SG-1 being (supposedly) like his family.

I agree he made a mistake, I was just pointing out that SG-1 do make very bad mistakes. 'Gemini' and 'Menace' for two.

Both of which were much more complicated than what Mitchell did. (and lets please not talk about Gemini.) They were matters of trust, while Mitchell simply, violated a direct order from the mission CO, for no high purpose, while in combat.

See, I see it differently. I see Lee deffering to her cuase he KNOWS she's smarter, NOT cause she's in charge. If she was, I doubt he'd have mouthed off like he did.

So she dresses him down once and its ok, but the second time she's not in command so she can't?

I agree with you. It's way too dangerous. Just like it's way too dangerous to have two nominal leads in combat, but SG-1 has that.

then we agree on that point. And on that note, I'm going to bed, rather late here. sleep well everyone.

[Lightsabre]

I was my impression that he told Landry he was coming. He kinda had to, pretty bad to randomly walk into the end of a pre-combat mission without being cleared.
And I stand by the fact that any colonel worth his salt wouldn't NEED to be asked, they wouldn't have showed up unless they couldn't handle it, and they'd watch thier own actions to make sure they were ok. Plus, I think that exchange of looks covered what needed to be from the stand point of SG-1 being (supposedly) like his family.

Maybe, but as i said before, people can think they are fine when they really aren't.
[QUOTE=ParadoxRealities]
Both of which were much more complicated than what Mitchell did. (and lets please not talk about Gemini.) They were matters of trust, while Mitchell simply, violated a direct order from the mission CO, for no high purpose, while in combat.[/quoite]
Still a mistake with bad consequences

So she dresses him down once and its ok, but the second time she's not in command so she can't?

No, she can't dress him down at all. But teh first time, he cops it. The second, he doesn't, cause she's NOT his boss and he HAS done his job.
That is how I see it.

then we agree on that point. And on that note, I'm going to bed, rather late here. sleep well everyone.

Have a good night!

[Mesenet]

Topic: I'd like to adress the Prototype incident, I don't have a lot more time online, so it's your only point I have time to address.

No, Daniel isn't a tech expert. BUT he does have signifigant experience in dealing with Goa'uld and Ancient technology, just by virutue of having been in the midst of it, and working with the team while they dealt with it for eight years. He also has the ability to understand both the Goa'uld and Ancient languages, so would be in a position to read any of the dials, buttons, whatever there were.

Mitchell had neither.

Even his experience and knowledge, Daniel was cautious with the panel trying to access the computer.

The mark of a good leader is to let your subordinates do what they're good at. NOT try to get your hand in every pie.

THANK YOU - well put.

[Uber]

Just oy. Landry ordered Sam to deal with the forwarding device not SG-1. Sam worked on the DHD to make sure they could all get home as a follow up to getting them there per Landry. I never said anything about SG-1 being ordered to do anything with the DHD. You want to twist my words, feel free.

Is defending Cameron Mitchell your reason for living or something? You were championing him before he had his first scene and it still seems to be your passion on this forum.

For now I'll let the other kids play with you because to be honest, you're quite frustrating...especially when you make up stuff as you go along and base whole premises on faulty reasoning.

And cool! Sam's over 71% now.

[Deejay435]

Her whole body language was tense and unsure. She didn't deal with Tonanee well at all,. If you want more specifics, you'll have to wait till I can get home and re-watch the DVD.
And I'll turn it back around on you. In those eps, how did she show exceptional leadership qualities?

Yeah, I do want more. And, not going to let you turn it around on me. You made a statement that claimed Sam showed poor leadership skills and have yet to back it up with anything but subjectiveness. God, I'm tired, cause I don't think that's even a word.

She comes to Jack and very apologetically tells him she's to take command when he is incapcitated. Jack tells her to do it now.
She hesitates, so he resigns.
After that, she doesn't give orders or do much of anything except tag along.
Make you feel better?

She apologized to her CO and friend for having to take over his command? And you catagorize this as her being apologetic through the whole mission?

She actually gives Jack an order after that, even tells him it's an order when he hems and haws about looking at the Teltac schematics things. When the others are concerned about the poisonus atmosphere she reminds them that they have hazmat suits for that very reason. That's not doing nothing.

Looks like I don't have to rewatch Nightwalkers after all, as someone upthread posted the relevent quotes. I think it's interesting that you objected to Scarimor's calling what Mitchell did a lie in OTG, yet turn around and say Carter lied when she didn't tell her team, in a room full of Goa'uld that she hadn't been Goa'ulded. That would have been pretty bad tactics, don't you think?

So you being hungry and exhausted isn't a risk?
You cannot compare what you do, however, to what was happening in that episode.

Not nearly as much as leaving them alone. Of course it's not the same as what happened in that episode, though there are life and death parallels. And hey, you're the one who asked what I would do in the same situation in my job.

I rewrote my reply after checking that ep, as I wasn't sure I was remembering it correctly.
Please see above for my updated comments.

I did. And as lots of people downthread covered the Dr. Lee thing exactly how I would have, I won't bore either of us by repeating their points.

Remember Prodigy, the first ones?the scientists are in charge and the military just make sure they don't die.

I think Prodigy made it very clear that the scientists weren't in charge. Jack shot them down several times.

You said you've mentioned episodes where the scientists were ordering the military? Which ones, and exact quotes because I have not seen this. At all.

How so? Cam screwed up once. SG-1 commits court martialable offences all the time.

Once? Well, there's also Collateral Damage, where Cam, while on a mission to a foreign planet, leaves his team without telling them where he's going so he can screw a foreign scientist.

*His team had no way of knowing where he was, if an emergency should arise.
*In fact, his team could have assumed he was MIA, and that there had been foul play, and caused serious trouble with whatever the planet's people are called.
*He had no way of knowing how such behavior on his part would be taken by the people with whom they were trying to establish a treaty. They hadn't been there long enough to know the social customs and mores of the planet, let alone the social intracacies of the science facility with which they were dealing.
*He was representing the USAF and Earth, he had no buisness going off to have a romantic liason with anyone while on duty. And when a team is off world, they're on duty. There's no playtime.
*His incredibly poor judgement got him accused of murder, and cost the team time they could have been using to trade for tech Earth could use against the Ori to get him out of hot water.

That was an incredible breach of protocol, terribly poor judgement, and behavior unbecoming an officer. Let alone someone who is supposed to be fit to lead a team.

Or from 'Menace' where Jack shot Reece. Or 'The Other Side' where they lost access to the alien technology.

When Jack shot Reece? Reece was controlling replicators who were overunning the base. They had seconds before the base auto-destruct was going to go off and blow them all to hell. AS far as they knew, Daniel was in danger from Reece, and they KNEW the base was. When Jack finally broke into the gateroom, he didn't have time to ask Daniel how the negotiations were coming. He had to stop Reece, and stop her right then. It was exactly what Jack told Daniel he would do in the first place.

And as far as The Other Side-You would have the US negotiate with people commiting genocide for alien tech? Okay. Kinda screwy morals you want them to have there, but whatever. I for one am glad they certainly did not. As Jack once said "Because we're the good guys."

[Mesenet]

Well, I have to say this is fascinating.
Contingent A: Everything Sam does is wrong. Contingent B: Everything Sam does is right. It's as if people are not watching the same show...

I think they are - just two points of view. However, it is starting to get tedious.
I am just scrolling through the thread to find new non debate postings. Thanks for the break.

[RealmOfX]

You still don't get it do you?

No, probably not. I will be the first to admit I"m not military

Basically, we've never seen what you describe, or rather I can't remember another ep where we do.
It's always been one person in command and that's it.
If there are some other eps, please let me know.
(Note:I'm not saying your wrong, only that I cannot remember seeing it on teh show and I want some more evidence before I agree.)

Actually, I just reread what I wrote and it was blunt - to the point of being rude. My apologies if you took it that way.

I'm not military either, but some of my family are. Military command can be complicated, add civilians to the mix and it gets even murkier.

I think our bone of contention is this "It's always been one person in command and that's it".
Yes, there is always only one mission commander. They have ultimate responsibility for everything. However, this does not mean that they are the only one allowed to give orders. If you have a mission objective to achieve then you can reasonably be expected to give an order to accomplish this, so sometimes you will get a civilian or subordinate personnel giving an order.

The trouble is the series SG-1 just doesn't always give you the mission briefing details, so we don't know definitively who is covering what objectives and therefore can reasonably be expected to give certain orders. This being the case, then different viewers will come to different conclusions.

Case in point - the episode Prototype the joint SG-1 & SG-5 scene:
My assumptions - Carter was in charge of the black hole objectives, SG-5 was along to do the observations, Carter is on SG-1 but not leading it, SG-1 and therefore Mitchell was in overall charge of the mission (no such thing as co-command in my view).
My conclusions - Carter gave a direct order to SG-5 in regard to the black hole observations without consulting Mitchell. Correct thing to do. Carter then stated her intentions to check out the DHD and waited for permission to do so. Carter is the tech person for SG-1 and as such it is acceptable for her to make the statement. The DHD part fell under Mitchell's area and so he nodded his permission. Correct thing to do.
Your assumption - Mitchell is in charge of all parts of the mission.
Your conclusion - Carter should never have given the order to SG-5. Correct. Carter should not have spoken up about the DHD and just waited for Mitchel to give the order. Debatable.
(please correct me if the above is not what you meant)

Both cases are correct based on the assumptions. The different assumptions could be made because it just wasn't clearly stated who had what responsibility.

What I was trying to see was if you understood about subordinates and civilians being allowed to give orders depending on their responsiblities, and I wasn't very clear.

I actually see where you are coming from now, I just don't happen to agree on the underlying assumption. Neither one of us can be proven categorically correct because we had to make assumptions because details were left out of the episode.

Thanks for the back and forth on these points because I like to understand other peoples views. But if we are going to debate military command in the abstract as opposed to "Who should lead SG-1" then I suggest we go to another thread.

[scarimor]

I don't know. Mitchell seemed awfully darn competent in The Scourge, and he seemed to be in charge during the whole ep to me.

Do you think so? I got the feeling that all four of the team were in charge at different points . Daniel was in charge during the teaser, Mitchell was in charge when Woolsey insisted SG-1 protect them, Teal'c was in charge when he and Mitchell were out trying to reach the fliers, and Carter was in charge when they went for the transmitter (I'm not counting her being in charge when she was alone guarding the delegates in the cave).

I really didn't see Mitchell taking a command role in this ep (though I think he was supposed to be doing so). It struck me as very odd that a team-leader does not know an essential mission protocol too and that Carter had to tell him (or very scary that he knew but forgot a crucial one, if that were the case).

Personally, I think people are too hung up on fairness. The real world doesn't work that way. New people are brought into new positions from somewhere else all the time. It happens in the military and it happens in business.

I agree, I'm not looking for fairness. But I like to see plausibility, so at the moment the only plausible explanation for the character-dynamics, mission structures and especially Mitchell's behaviour is that Mitchell is learning to command an SG team while Carter has the same responsibilities and sort of trains him. That's what's happening on screen.

[Lightsabre]

Just oy. Landry ordered Sam to deal with the forwarding device not SG-1. Sam worked on the DHD to make sure they could all get home as a follow up to getting them there per Landry. I never said anything about SG-1 being ordered to do anything with the DHD. You want to twist my words, feel free.

I've explained this several times now. IF you won't read my posts on teh subject, please stop posting on it.

Is defending Cameron Mitchell your reason for living or something? You were championing him before he had his first scene and it still seems to be your passion on this forum.

Is championing Samantha Carter yours? Is railroading everyone who doesn't share your opinion of her your sole goal in life? Cause it certainly seems to be.
You've been aggressive and combative ever since I first posted on this subject last year. If you hate me or my opinion that much, use your ignore list.
But stop the nasty little sentences like the one above. It's no crime ot like Cameron Mitchell or think he should be the leader.

For now I'll let the other kids play with you because to be honest, you're quite frustrating...especially when you make up stuff as you go along and base whole premises on faulty reasoning.

I'M frustrating?
Someone who cannot seems to read or understand explanations you've posted at least 3 times, then accuses you of making stuff up and faulty reasoning?
I suggest you try learning to debate.
There is a principle called 'even if'.
This means you take the opponents position and explain why it doesn't work, even if you accept their initial premise as correct.
Anytime I do that, you get upset, offended and accuse me of faulty logic.
I would put it to you that it's not my logic, rather it's your lack of knowledge of how to debate/argue a point.
FOr instance, you can't seem to post without making it personal.

[Lightsabre]

Actually, I just reread what I wrote and it was blunt - to the point of being rude. My apologies if you took it that way.

I did, but I thought it was coming from frustration, rather than a desire to be rude/combative.

I'm not military either, but some of my family are. Military command can be complicated, add civilians to the mix and it gets even murkier.

I think our bone of contention is this "It's always been one person in command and that's it".
Yes, there is always only one mission commander. They have ultimate responsibility for everything. However, this does not mean that they are the only one allowed to give orders. If you have a mission objective to achieve then you can reasonably be expected to give an order to accomplish this, so sometimes you will get a civilian or subordinate personnel giving an order.

Yes, I understand and I agree with what you defined as our 'bone of contention'.

The trouble is the series SG-1 just doesn't always give you the mission briefing details, so we don't know definitively who is covering what objectives and therefore can reasonably be expected to give certain orders. This being the case, then different viewers will come to different conclusions.

Which is clearly what happened here.

Case in point - the episode Prototype the joint SG-1 & SG-5 scene:
My assumptions - Carter was in charge of the black hole objectives, SG-5 was along to do the observations, Carter is on SG-1 but not leading it, SG-1 and therefore Mitchell was in overall charge of the mission (no such thing as co-command in my view).

I agree so far

My conclusions - Carter gave a direct order to SG-5 in regard to the black hole observations without consulting Mitchell. Correct thing to do. Carter then stated her intentions to check out the DHD and waited for permission to do so. Carter is the tech person for SG-1 and as such it is acceptable for her to make the statement. The DHD part fell under Mitchell's area and so he nodded his permission. Correct thing to do.

I think my main problem was Sam just told Cam, 'I'm doing this'. His nod seemed superflous. She was going to do it whether he thought she should or not. Telling him was simply a bare nod to military courtesy.
Using your conclusions, I agree with everything except what I've specified above.

Your assumption - Mitchell is in charge of all parts of the mission.
Your conclusion - Carter should never have given the order to SG-5. Correct. Carter should not have spoken up about the DHD and just waited for Mitchel to give the order. Debatable.
(please correct me if the above is not what you meant)

Close.
Carter should have waited for Mitchell's ok before giving orders. Carter should have waited on Cam's nod and her tone and words we all wrong in my opinion.
Again, it's a subtle thing. It's how I say the scene. I accept if you feel differently.

Both cases are correct based on the assumptions. The different assumptions could be made because it just wasn't clearly stated who had what responsibility.

Agreed, it was murky.

What I was trying to see was if you understood about subordinates and civilians being allowed to give orders depending on their responsiblities, and I wasn't very clear.

I actually see where you are coming from now, I just don't happen to agree on the underlying assumption. Neither one of us can be proven categorically correct because we had to make assumptions because details were left out of the episode.

Thanks for the back and forth on these points because I like to understand other peoples views. But if we are going to debate military command in the abstract as opposed to "Who should lead SG-1" then I suggest we go to another thread.

Yes, we probably should let the military command piece die now.
Thank you for taking the time to explain what you meant. I understand where you are coming from now.
I don't 100% agree, but I can see your point of view.

[Lightsabre]

Yeah, I do want more. And, not going to let you turn it around on me. You made a statement that claimed Sam showed poor leadership skills and have yet to back it up with anything but subjectiveness. God, I'm tired, cause I don't think that's even a word.

Yes, because it's a sunjective statement. I've given my reasons and told you that more would need to wait till I could re-watch my dvd.
But I've never said it was ANYTHING but my opinion, which is subjective.
As to not letting me turn it around, so I'm expected to defend my statements and positions, but you aren't?
No, if you want to make your statements, then back them up. IF you can't, or refuse to, then you are admitting you cannot make your case.

She apologized to her CO and friend for having to take over his command? And you catagorize this as her being apologetic through the whole mission?

Yeah, I do.

She actually gives Jack an order after that, even tells him it's an order when he hems and haws about looking at the Teltac schematics things. When the others are concerned about the poisonus atmosphere she reminds them that they have hazmat suits for that very reason. That's not doing nothing.

It also wasn't terrible authoritive. I did not get the sense of a strong leader from her. yes she tells Jack it's an order, but I didn't get an assertive leader sense, more of a child with a new toy.
But THAT is my take and my opinion.

Looks like I don't have to rewatch Nightwalkers after all, as someone upthread posted the relevent quotes. I think it's interesting that you objected to Scarimor's calling what Mitchell did a lie in OTG, yet turn around and say Carter lied when she didn't tell her team, in a room full of Goa'uld that she hadn't been Goa'ulded. That would have been pretty bad tactics, don't you think?

I don't recall stating she should have said "Hey, Jonas, Teal'c, it's ok, I"m not a go'auld."
I did say she could have surreptiously let them know she was ok.
And yes, I do object to it being called a lie. It was at least as tenuous situation as this. I later admitted that lie might have been too strong a word.
However, if Mitchell was wrong for what he did, Sam was wrong for this.

Not nearly as much as leaving them alone. Of course it's not the same as what happened in that episode, though there are life and death parallels. And hey, you're the one who asked what I would do in the same situation in my job.

Yes, since I couldn't conceive of a job that would reasonably
a)expect 24 hour and more shifts and
b)accept an abusive boss.
If you do, bully for you, but the rest of us don't work those hours and you cannot reasonably expect the average person to.

I did. And as lots of people downthread covered the Dr. Lee thing exactly how I would have, I won't bore either of us by repeating their points.

Well since that's been resolved to my satisfaction, thank you.

I think Prodigy made it very clear that the scientists weren't in charge. Jack shot them down several times.

Jack did. The previous colonel didn't. THat seems to indicate it's a battle of wills. Jack trumpted the scientist by merely refusing to do anything he didn't want to do.

You said you've mentioned episodes where the scientists were ordering the military? Which ones, and exact quotes because I have not seen this. At all.

Prodigy and the first ones off the top of my head.
I"m not researching exact quotes.
Watch the eps or read the transcripts.

Once? Well, there's also Collateral Damage, where Cam, while on a mission to a foreign planet, leaves his team without telling them where he's going so he can screw a foreign scientist.

And? so? he needs to tell them where he is 24/7?
Bull. He acceted an invitation from a lovely woman. IF the situation hadn't turned out the way it did, no one would have accused him of anything.
you are really reaching here.

*His team had no way of knowing where he was, if an emergency should arise.
*In fact, his team could have assumed he was MIA, and that there had been foul play, and caused serious trouble with whatever the planet's people are called.
*He had no way of knowing how such behavior on his part would be taken by the people with whom they were trying to establish a treaty. They hadn't been there long enough to know the social customs and mores of the planet, let alone the social intracacies of the science facility with which they were dealing.
*He was representing the USAF and Earth, he had no buisness going off to have a romantic liason with anyone while on duty. And when a team is off world, they're on duty. There's no playtime.
*His incredibly poor judgement got him accused of murder, and cost the team time they could have been using to trade for tech Earth could use against the Ori to get him out of hot water.

All BS.
His judgement was poor? He was attacked by someone who'd obviously planned his crime out. THat's Mitchell's fault?
People would assume because he left a party with a woman and didn't come home that there was trouble??
What the hell kinda world do you live in?
If one of my mates left a party with a woman and didn't come home, I wouldn't expect trouble.
As to the culture, well if it was unacceptable, she wouldn't have made the offer, would she?

That was an incredible breach of protocol, terribly poor judgement, and behavior unbecoming an officer. Let alone someone who is supposed to be fit to lead a team.

Again, BS.
All he did was walk her home.

When Jack shot Reece? Reece was controlling replicators who were overunning the base. They had seconds before the base auto-destruct was going to go off and blow them all to hell.

AS far as they knew, Daniel was in danger from Reece, and they KNEW the base was. When Jack finally broke into the gateroom, he didn't have time to ask Daniel how the negotiations were coming. He had to stop Reece, and stop her right then. It was exactly what Jack told Daniel he would do in the first place.

All he had to do was yell, 'shut them down'. If she didn't THEN he could have blasted her.
It was still a massive mistake that cost them the chance to stop the replicators.
Jack's prejudice was at work there.

And as far as The Other Side-You would have the US negotiate with people commiting genocide for alien tech? Okay. Kinda screwy morals you want them to have there, but whatever. I for one am glad they certainly did not. As Jack once said "Because we're the good guys."

I didn't say that. God you are good at putting words in other people's mouths.
There is a difference between not negotiating with someone and actively destroying their defences and their way of life.
SG-1 could have just left, they didn't have to kill them all.