PDA

View Full Version : tPF The Prime Directive



Green Arrow
10-27-2017, 08:03 PM
This is one of my all-time favorite Star Trek moments, from the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode "Symbiosis."


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppykquyAUyY

In the episode, Captain Picard and his crew are faced with a dilemma. The Ornarans are apparently suffering from a terrible disease for which there is only one treatment: felicium, created by the Brekkians. The Ornarans traded with the Brekkians for the felicium, but their freighter disintegrated in orbit of a star. The crew of the Enterprise were able to save two Ornarans and two Brekkians, as well as the felicium. However, the Brekkians refuse to give the Ornarans the felicium since they no longer had the goods they were trading to the Brekkians. Over the course of the episode, Captain Picard and Dr. Crusher learn that there is no plague on the Ornarans, and that it is actually a severe addiction to the felicium, which is a narcotic. The Brekkians eventually agree to give the felicium to the Ornarans after Picard tells them that the Prime Directive keeps him from interfering in their business, and the four are ready to beam down to their planet with the felicium and some coils to help repair the Ornaran freighters that facilitate the trade. Captain Picard refuses to give them the coils, however, again citing the Prime Directive. The aliens are beamed home and Picard has this discussion with Dr. Crusher.

The Prime Directive is, in my opinion, the best possible philosophy the U.S. could adopt when it comes to foreign affairs. It is the position of balance between all the competing ideologies of isolationism, interventionism, non-interventionism, and realism. We can interfere in other cultures for the purpose of our own defense and the defense of our allies, but not unprovoked and not without compelling national interest. As Picard says to Dr. Crusher, every time a more developed civilization interferes in the affairs of less developed civilizations, no matter how well-intentioned, disaster ensues. This has been proven to translate into the real world, particularly where the Middle East is concerned. When the Ottoman Empire collapsed in the aftermath of World War I, the more well-developed nations of the winning side arbitrarily determined the new borders based on what they thought was best for their nations, and the result was unmitigated disaster that still plagues us today, over one hundred years later. In 2003, we destabilized Iraq by taking out Saddam Hussein, ostensibly for humanitarian reasons. The result was a weak Iraqi central government and a power vacuum that the terrorist group ISIL was more than happy to fill, which caused yet another humanitarian and security crisis. In 2011, we helped eliminate Muammar Gadhafi in Libya, which gave ISIL and other terror groups another power vacuum. In 2013, we began destabilizing the Assad regime, which gave ISIL a foothold in THAT country.

It's time to put away the failed foreign policies of the past and try out a real world Prime Directive.

Captain Obvious
10-27-2017, 08:24 PM
Neoconism is the establishments best or one of their best tools.

Sticking our dick in the apple pie of other countries is very beneficial to it.

waltky
10-27-2017, 11:54 PM
Granny says, "Dat's right...

... sometimes ya gotta use...

... 'tough love'.

Kacper
10-28-2017, 12:41 AM
... In 2013, we began destabilizing the Assad regime, which gave ISIL a foothold in THAT country.


Regardless of what else I think of Syria and Bashar al-Assad, what he did was the most brilliant chess move I have ever seen to remain in power. By targeting the more moderate factions and empowering his then weakest but most violent enemy in the multi-front civil war, he outplayed the entire western world that was completely blind-sided. The only possible alternatives were a brutal dictator or a group of evil to the core radical Muslim extremists. He took every other piece off the table. Literally nobody saw that coming. "Well, eventually Assad must go" is about the closest thing the west can mutter at this point because nobody is willing to admit that now Assad must remain.

donttread
10-28-2017, 03:56 PM
This is one of my all-time favorite Star Trek moments, from the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode "Symbiosis."


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppykquyAUyY

In the episode, Captain Picard and his crew are faced with a dilemma. The Ornarans are apparently suffering from a terrible disease for which there is only one treatment: felicium, created by the Brekkians. The Ornarans traded with the Brekkians for the felicium, but their freighter disintegrated in orbit of a star. The crew of the Enterprise were able to save two Ornarans and two Brekkians, as well as the felicium. However, the Brekkians refuse to give the Ornarans the felicium since they no longer had the goods they were trading to the Brekkians. Over the course of the episode, Captain Picard and Dr. Crusher learn that there is no plague on the Ornarans, and that it is actually a severe addiction to the felicium, which is a narcotic. The Brekkians eventually agree to give the felicium to the Ornarans after Picard tells them that the Prime Directive keeps him from interfering in their business, and the four are ready to beam down to their planet with the felicium and some coils to help repair the Ornaran freighters that facilitate the trade. Captain Picard refuses to give them the coils, however, again citing the Prime Directive. The aliens are beamed home and Picard has this discussion with Dr. Crusher.

The Prime Directive is, in my opinion, the best possible philosophy the U.S. could adopt when it comes to foreign affairs. It is the position of balance between all the competing ideologies of isolationism, interventionism, non-interventionism, and realism. We can interfere in other cultures for the purpose of our own defense and the defense of our allies, but not unprovoked and not without compelling national interest. As Picard says to Dr. Crusher, every time a more developed civilization interferes in the affairs of less developed civilizations, no matter how well-intentioned, disaster ensues. This has been proven to translate into the real world, particularly where the Middle East is concerned. When the Ottoman Empire collapsed in the aftermath of World War I, the more well-developed nations of the winning side arbitrarily determined the new borders based on what they thought was best for their nations, and the result was unmitigated disaster that still plagues us today, over one hundred years later. In 2003, we destabilized Iraq by taking out Saddam Hussein, ostensibly for humanitarian reasons. The result was a weak Iraqi central government and a power vacuum that the terrorist group ISIL was more than happy to fill, which caused yet another humanitarian and security crisis. In 2011, we helped eliminate Muammar Gadhafi in Libya, which gave ISIL and other terror groups another power vacuum. In 2013, we began destabilizing the Assad regime, which gave ISIL a foothold in THAT country.

It's time to put away the failed foreign policies of the past and try out a real world Prime Directive.

Yes, non intervention is the way to go. But it's not as profitable in the short trm as imperialism is

Peter1469
10-28-2017, 09:26 PM
Yes, non intervention is the way to go. But it's not as profitable in the short trm as imperialism is


There is a middle path between non-intervention and imperialism. It has to do with your self-interests.

donttread
10-29-2017, 05:59 AM
There is a middle path between non-intervention and imperialism. It has to do with your self-interests.

Self interest in the short run can be very different than self interest in the long run. A simple fact of life government fails to demonstrate a grasp of even in domestic politics. But t least only messibg with countries out of true self interest should be a step in the right direction. We have military in what 130 some countries now?

donttread
10-29-2017, 06:04 AM
There is a middle path between non-intervention and imperialism. It has to do with your self-interests.


Also, I think GA's point is largely about the unintended conseqences of any intervention, no matter how altrustic of self serving. We certainly have an incredible body of evidence in the ME over the past several decades proving the Federation and Captain Picard correct.