Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sam Carter/Jack O'Neill Ship Discussion Thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by VSS View Post
    Spoiler:
    Lol!


    Yes, for a change it was Sam who gave the little ethics talk about not killing baby goa'uld, and then Daniel seems to agree- but then when they're walking away he turns around and fires a dozen rounds into the tank.

    Daniel doesn't just have passion, he's got a dark side, too. And that reminds me,which came first- Anakin killing off the Sand People and their kids or Daniel blasting the baby goa-ulds? I think Star Wars perhaps copied Stargate on this. Is it the same thing? Or was what Daniel did not quite as bad because the go'aulds always kill to survive- they have no choice. Or does that someone make their taking a host acceptable, as Zipacna argued in Pretense?

    Still, I don't think Jack would have done it, not after that little speech of Sam's.
    I think the Daniel scene came first, but it was very much the same thing ...condemning a whole race because of the actions of the adults. but up to this point they hadn't even heard of any "good' gou'ald...they didn't know about the Tok'ra yet. would daniel still had done it after meeting the Tok'ra? I think so. the pain of losing Sha're and Skaara to the gou'ald was still very fresh for him. It was his way of trying to prevent having someone go through what he went through.
    I must disagree on one point: I think Jack would have done it even after sam's pep talk. He is a very pragmatic man. he would want to hurt the gou'ald somehow and that would be an effective way to kill a whole lot at once.

    Comment


      Originally posted by Rac80 View Post
      I think the Daniel scene came first, but it was very much the same thing ...condemning a whole race because of the actions of the adults. but up to this point they hadn't even heard of any "good' gou'ald...they didn't know about the Tok'ra yet. would daniel still had done it after meeting the Tok'ra? I think so. the pain of losing Sha're and Skaara to the gou'ald was still very fresh for him. It was his way of trying to prevent having someone go through what he went through.
      I must disagree on one point: I think Jack would have done it even after sam's pep talk. He is a very pragmatic man. he would want to hurt the gou'ald somehow and that would be an effective way to kill a whole lot at once.
      I guess we'll agree to disagree. Sam was actually right in a lot of ways- it's ingrained in professional soldiers that you don't kill innocents. In the vietnam era they used to call soldiers "baby-killers", and I'm pretty sure Jack would remember that. It doesn't matter that they would grow up to be evil- they weren't yet. That would have swayed Jack, I think. Also, it wasn't his wife that was taken, and he can think more rationally about it.

      On the other hand, they didn't know about the genetic knowledge of the go'auld at that time, did they? If the babies do have genetic knowledge, then they aren't innocent, they're just immature. In which case, Sam probably would have done the honors herself!

      Comment


        Originally posted by VSS View Post
        I guess we'll agree to disagree. Sam was actually right in a lot of ways- it's ingrained in professional soldiers that you don't kill innocents. In the vietnam era they used to call soldiers "baby-killers", and I'm pretty sure Jack would remember that. It doesn't matter that they would grow up to be evil- they weren't yet. That would have swayed Jack, I think. Also, it wasn't his wife that was taken, and he can think more rationally about it.

        On the other hand, they didn't know about the genetic knowledge of the go'auld at that time, did they? If the babies do have genetic knowledge, then they aren't innocent, they're just immature. In which case, Sam probably would have done the honors herself!
        I can see your point. I don't know if they knew about the genetic memory of the gou'ald yet. teal'c gave them so much info in the first few eps it made my headspin. I remember the "baby-killers" shouts (I have two bros in law who are vietnam vets) BUT I don't see the symbiotes as "babies" so I project that jack wouldn't either. It is hard to remember when they learned what they learned. (ok does that make sense?)
        i agree that daniel was acting not thinking at all. the loss of Sha're was devastating to him and he reacted accordingly.

        Comment


          Originally posted by Rac80 View Post
          I can see your point. I don't know if they knew about the genetic memory of the gou'ald yet. teal'c gave them so much info in the first few eps it made my headspin. I remember the "baby-killers" shouts (I have two bros in law who are vietnam vets) BUT I don't see the symbiotes as "babies" so I project that jack wouldn't either. It is hard to remember when they learned what they learned. (ok does that make sense?)
          i agree that daniel was acting not thinking at all. the loss of Sha're was devastating to him and he reacted accordingly.
          Oh, that bolded part is very true! It's one of the themes of scifi in general that sentient life, good and evil are not what they appear to be. Not at all what we are used to. I think that the team has to learn that lesson over and over!

          Comment


            Originally posted by VSS View Post
            I guess we'll agree to disagree. Sam was actually right in a lot of ways- it's ingrained in professional soldiers that you don't kill innocents. In the vietnam era they used to call soldiers "baby-killers", and I'm pretty sure Jack would remember that. It doesn't matter that they would grow up to be evil- they weren't yet. That would have swayed Jack, I think. Also, it wasn't his wife that was taken, and he can think more rationally about it.

            On the other hand, they didn't know about the genetic knowledge of the go'auld at that time, did they? If the babies do have genetic knowledge, then they aren't innocent, they're just immature. In which case, Sam probably would have done the honors herself!
            This is why I don't see the infant go'auld as innocent or even would use the word infant. They may not have total control of the host (as in Kawalsky) but even in that case, it definitely had evilness written all over it! It had the intent to do harm to the human race.

            I also think Jack would have done the same as Daniel. He had a special place in his heart for Ska'ra and I think after what happened with Kawalsky, he wouldn't have agreed the infants were innocent.

            What a great discussion!!
            sigpic
            Thank you Astra Per Aspera for the sig....... My Fan Fiction

            Comment


              Originally posted by gater62 View Post
              This is why I don't see the infant go'auld as innocent or even would use the word infant. They may not have total control of the host (as in Kawalsky) but even in that case, it definitely had evilness written all over it! It had the intent to do harm to the human race.

              I also think Jack would have done the same as Daniel. He had a special place in his heart for Ska'ra and I think after what happened with Kawalsky, he wouldn't have agreed the infants were innocent.

              What a great discussion!!
              That's a good point about Kawalsky. At this point, they've seen what an infant go'auld can do and know that they're evil from the start, so yes, Jack probably would have done the same.
              sigpic

              Comment


                Originally posted by Rac80 View Post
                I can see your point. I don't know if they knew about the genetic memory of the gou'ald yet. teal'c gave them so much info in the first few eps it made my headspin. I remember the "baby-killers" shouts (I have two bros in law who are vietnam vets) BUT I don't see the symbiotes as "babies" so I project that jack wouldn't either. It is hard to remember when they learned what they learned. (ok does that make sense?)
                i agree that daniel was acting not thinking at all. the loss of Sha're was devastating to him and he reacted accordingly.
                I agree. I don't think Jack would have any qualms about killing larval Goa'uld. Firstly, he's practical - these larvas would eventually mature and take some people as hosts, so by killing them he not only gets rid of his enemy but also saves some lives; secondly Jack can be incredibly ruthless in his soldier mode and thirdly, out of all SG-1 he often comes across as the most hateful and distrustful of Goa'uld's, even more than Daniel and Teal'c at times.

                I think this scene, where it's Daniel doing the cold blooded killing is shocking for everyone, but it's also in character for him. And it helps to explain where this darkness he displays in "Absolute Power" came from.
                There's a good chance this opinion is shared by Ashizuri
                sigpic
                awesome sig by Josiane

                Comment


                  Well, I looked all around for a smilie that's waving a little white flag, but couldn't find one...

                  So- if Jack and Daniel would kill all those poor little baby goa'uld, why wouldn't Sam? She's certainly seen what they can do, too. But she certainly waxed philosophical over these little guys.

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by VSS View Post
                    Well, I looked all around for a smilie that's waving a little white flag, but couldn't find one...

                    So- if Jack and Daniel would kill all those poor little baby goa'uld, why wouldn't Sam? She's certainly seen what they can do, too. But she certainly waxed philosophical over these little guys.
                    I'm not really sure what was up with Sam! Perhaps the scientist was looking for an excuse to keep those little guys around and used the sympathy ploy. I really need to rewatch it. Sam seems to be sympathetic to creatures and aliens that appear to need protecting. Is it TPTB trying to make Sam look more feminine? Whoa!
                    sigpic
                    Thank you Astra Per Aspera for the sig....... My Fan Fiction

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by gater62 View Post
                      I'm not really sure what was up with Sam! Perhaps the scientist was looking for an excuse to keep those little guys around and used the sympathy ploy. I really need to rewatch it. Sam seems to be sympathetic to creatures and aliens that appear to need protecting. Is it TPTB trying to make Sam look more feminine? Whoa!
                      Well, her argument is very sound from the perspective of Western ethical thinking. What Daniel did was make himself judge, jury and executioner which is prohibited under our law, both military and civil. The larval goa'uld were no threat to him at that moment, nor would they be for many years. He had time to think about it, but didn't.

                      It's just that as a society, we've never run into anyone (using the term loosely here) who is absolutely guaranteed to be evil by nature. That is not a concept we recognize at all. We believe in innocent until proven guilty and Daniel literally blew that concept away.

                      So I don't think they were portraying Sam as being feminine, so much as presenting our way of thinking. Which, in this setting, may not apply.

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by VSS View Post
                        Well, her argument is very sound from the perspective of Western ethical thinking. What Daniel did was make himself judge, jury and executioner which is prohibited under our law, both military and civil. The larval goa'uld were no threat to him at that moment. He had time to think about it, but didn't.

                        It's just that as a society, we've never run into anyone (using the term loosely here) who is absolutely guaranteed to be evil by nature. That is not a concept we recognize at all. We believe in innocent until proven guilty and Daniel literally blew that concept away.

                        So I don't think they were portraying Sam as being feminine, so much as presenting our way of thinking. Which, in this setting, may not apply.
                        I also think that Sam didn't have the personal connection to the Gou'ald as both Daniel and Jack had. She didn't have a spouse or close friend taken by a gou'ald. I agree that she was representing our (western) idea of justice. Daniel on the other hand was pure emotion- hatred.

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by Rac80 View Post
                          I also think that Sam didn't have the personal connection to the Gou'ald as both Daniel and Jack had. She didn't have a spouse or close friend taken by a gou'ald. I agree that she was representing our (western) idea of justice. Daniel on the other hand was pure emotion- hatred.
                          That's a good point about Sam not having the emotional connection that Daniel and Jack have. She barely met Sha're and only had a little bit of time with Ska'ara in the go'auld prison, not really enough time to form that connection that Jack and Daniel had. She also wasn't that close to Kawalsky, had only served with him a few days. Jack and Daniel have the emotional connection with him from Abydos. Given that, Sam would have been acting as a soldier.

                          However, even though she seemed shocked by what Daniel did, never once did she berate him over it. She seemed to understand why he did it, even if she didn't agree.
                          sigpic

                          Comment


                            You all make really good points about the goa'uld. I can see Jack thinking they're evil and not wanting them to take a human host. The only reason for not doing it that I can think of is secrecy. SG1 are sneaking around on chulak trying not to get noticed, if they start shooting up the temple thingy people are going to notice and it would make their escape harder - which is what happens.
                            sigpicMy Fanfic

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by Aveo_amacus View Post
                              You all make really good points about the goa'uld. I can see Jack thinking they're evil and not wanting them to take a human host. The only reason for not doing it that I can think of is secrecy. SG1 are sneaking around on chulak trying not to get noticed, if they start shooting up the temple thingy people are going to notice and it would make their escape harder - which is what happens.
                              Good point. I remember thinking there had to have been a better way to destroy the tank, without alerting the priest and Jaffa. After all a P-90 isn't exactly quiet. Another indicator that Daniel really wasn't thinking, he was just acting on emotion.
                              sigpic

                              Comment


                                I agree, that was a noisy way to destroy the symbiotes! And, they didn't even run out of that clearing after Daniel did it! Maybe they didn't expect anyone to come.

                                On the other hand, we all know what gunshots sound like (from TV if nothing else) but maybe the goa'uld don't attach the same significance to the noise- because they don't know it's the sound of projectile-based weaponry. But they will!
                                Spoiler:
                                What was that?
                                The sound of a car backfiring?
                                We don't have cars on Chulak, either.
                                Oh.



                                I was bored. Well, I could go watch Fire & Water, since that's what we're talking about today!
                                Last edited by VSS; 29 April 2009, 05:43 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X