Captain Jean-Luc Picard

There was no "Kirk VS Kahn". I'm speaking of a personal fight between the hero and the villian, as in like hand combat and such.

But hey, if you're using the "battle of whits" between Kirk and Kahn, then that works!

I don't mean to make waves here but the military DOES make the soldiers drones in a sense. What do you think boot camp is for? Drill instructors jobs are to break the individual down so that they do take orders with no questions asked. Yes, they do maintain their personality but in the end they are taught not to question their superiors or defy them.

Um, that's kinda how the military works. You do your job without asking questions. That's what you are trained to do. It's not a democracy or republic or whatever. Sometimes, you do what you're told or you end up dead. That's part of the reason why the military is as is.

I have discussed this topic on other boards, and although no one disagree's that Saddam's Regime was brutal, there appears to be no real reason put forward for the INVASION of a soveriegn state other than to look for Weapon's of Mass Destruction.

 

AND THERE ARE NO WEAPON'S OF MASS DESTRUCTION IN IRAQ.

 

Why?

 

Because WoMD are designed to deter INVASION.

 

ONLY A MAD MAN would consider using them...which makes Saddam's Regime seem a little less 'bad' doesn't it?

 

Since they haven't used WoMD.

Um... He kills his soldiers if they dissagree with him. He'll torture them, rape the women and children in his family, kill people he loves, just to keep him in line. How is that not brutal? He's killed his own people by the thousands if not millions, just becuase they don't act the way he wants them to. Isn't that enough reason to go to war with Hussien? No weapons of mass destruction? Gee... Guess ya missed the news reporting that they found weapons of mass destruction, huh? Only a mad man would consider using them? News flash: Suddam Hussien is a mad mad. He'd even sell them to other countries without considerring the after effects.

Why are the US Military Borgs?

 

Because they follow order's and do not question them.

I could say the same about Starfleet.

Question: If the US military had been sent to 'liberate', would they not have sought the SURRENDER of the Iraqi army through negotiation?

 

Answer:

Their ORDERS were to destroy the Iraqi MILITARY and REGIME so it could then be REPLACED with one which would CAPITULATE to US demands.

 

If you do not trust my words try think it through for yourself.

 

Why does another country INVADE another country? Look at history, ignore who is doing the invading, think it through LOGICALLY like a VULCAN. Then maybe you will see through the LIES that are being used to hide the truth.

 

And what is the TRUTH?

That no one has the right to INVADE another country UNLESS the UN (Federation) AGREE'S it is necessary...

 

And they did not, now did they?

 

The US Military ARE behaving like Borg, IT'S THEIR JOB.

 

The only way to control Borg is to make sure the QUEEN does not have HOSTILE intent.

 

Yee-ha!!

We tried to seek the surrender of the Iraqi army. Only, if they start surrenderring, Hussien starts killing them. Understand? We aren't replacing their military. When all this is over, they will have their own military. Oh, and the thing about the military behaving like the Borg? They don't. Are they not allowed to question orders? Yes, other wise, the military wouldn't be able to function.

Well said, Emanon. I have to agree with you. If you put aside all the political propaganda and try to look at this entire situation logically and without any flag waving, your points make sense. At this point, only history and the court of world opinion will have final judgement on the U.S's action.

There are times when you simply cannot look at things logically. As Spock said in Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country, "Logic is the beginning of wisdom, not the end."

If everyone in the world was gay. If all the men slept with men, and all the women slept with women and that was the way it had always been, would you do it? Would you marry a man? Sleep with him? Live with him forever? Or would you go to straight bars? And go out with a girl. And say to heck with everybody: you like women and that is that. If you dont like it then tough!??? Spirituality has nothing to do with it. A person is no less spiritual if they are gay. And if you cant tolerate things like homosexuality, people who are different then you miss the whole point of Star Trek. There are people who, in the 60's, wouldnt watch an inter-ratial kiss. Where are they today? The same place you will be a couple of decades from now.

Men with men, women with women? What if it had allways been that way? That's not possible. If that happened, very few would reproduce, if any, and whe'd have the genocide of humanity within a thousand years.

Spirituallity has a lot to do with it. I do not know of any religons who condone homosexuallity. I myself am a Christian, but I didn't want to get into that as it seems most Trek fans are aetheist. I never said someone would be less spiritual if they're gay, but from a spiritual standpoint, it's still wrong.

I can tollerrate homosexuallity as it's up to the person to choose their life style. That doesn't mean I have to like it, nor do I condone it. Murderrs are different than me, should I tollerate them too? After all, you said if I can't tollerrate those different from me, I missed the point of Star Trek.

Anti-ractial kissing and the unatural act of 2 of the same sex engaged in a relationship are entirely different things. It's like comparring cars and horses.

The "timeline" that Harry crashed into, didn't exist till his shuttle accident. The moment he was there, he had never been on Voyager. Well, he retains the personallity of the previous timeline, so he was on Voyager, only he wasn't. It's a little confusing. Anyway, when Harry was beamed into space just before the runabout (like the ones on DS9) exploded, Harry had been sent back to the shuttle that crashed into the time stream, thus the timeline was repaired, thus Tom never died and that runabout prototype never existed.

Still confused?

Well, I'm writing a time travel trilogy called FUTURE'S END.

In the story, there's a time machine called a "timegate" Basically, it has 3 emitters equally spaced apart that fire at the center of the gate, creating such tremendous force, that a "hole" is ripped in space time, almost like a black hole, only microscopic. The gate then fires a quick burst from the 3 emitters, shifting the "hole" to a temporal rift, the gate then pulls it open into a full temporal rift, ready for time travel.

Now, put science aside for a moment.

If you had the right technology, would that be possible to create a temporal rift?

I mean... forcing the right form of matter from 3 directions into a center point, thus creating a tear in space time, then shooting that tear with a specified type of energy, then using a specialized field to pull it open?

Don't worry about offending me. If I'm completely off, please tell me.

I voted that I don't care.

As long as one of the following is made, I'm happy:

Deep Space Nine

Voyager

Mixed cast

New cast

NOTE: I like the idea of waiting till the series has ended before making a movie.

Very interresting! However, I ment a black hole being the power source, not the means of travelling...

What about using matter and anti-matter? Mix the 2 substances in a controlled reaction. This massive and explossive cancellation of each other would then be forced through 3 emitters equally space apart, say on a large metallic ring or something, firring at a center-point, then creating a black hole (or find something else powerful enough to do so), then modify it so it could be a means of time travel, then rip this "hole" in time open large enough for people to travel through.

This is simply an idea. Is it at all plausable?

No episodes were filmed, as the pilot was turned into the movie. There's a book out with detailed information on Star Trek: Phase II including many pictures!

I doubt it would be very successful.

It'd be like...

ROSWELL - without Liz Parker

THE X FILES - without Dana Scully

STARGATE SG-1 - without Daniel Jackson (he's back for the final season, woo-hoo!)

Star Trek: The Next Generation - without Data

Smallville - without Lex Luther

See, these are essential characters. Spock was simply part of Star Trek.

Voyagerboy,

1. Nemsis was intended to possibly be the last TNG movie. They said if it was a success, they'd do one more and that'd be it. If this one bombed, they probably wouln't make another. Since it did, I don't expect a 5th TNG movie.

2. DS9 & VOY were great shows, but niether were successful enough to warrant a major motion picture event.

3. Since fans want more TNG movies even though Nemesis was the end, other fans want DS9, and fans like you and me want a VOY movie...

I say the best bet is to do a mixed cast movie. And maybe include a "flashback" scene to ENT, perhaps?

Anyway, if they do do a mixed cast movie, who would you like to see in the movie?

Since they can't bring the whole cast for a mixed cast movie, here's who I'd like to see:

Admiral Janeway

Commander Tuvok

Lieutennant Harry Kim

Ensign Seven of Nine

I voted yes. Not becuase of confussion, but becuase I don't like abreviations in place of official titles.

Besides, we all know it's Star Trek... Why not just put the name of the series and drop the "Star Trek" part?

Click for Spoiler:

Riker and Troi get married.

Data died.

Worf returned to the Enterprise.

The Soong Legacy lives on through B4.

Peace begins with the Romulans.

I call that conclussion!

2151 - ENT season 1

2152 - ENT season 1 / season 2

2153 - ENT season 2 / season 3

2266 - TOS season 1

2267 - TOS season 1 / season 2

2268 - TOS season 2 / season 3

2269 - TOS season 3

2271 - Star Trek: The Motion Picture

2285 - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Kahn / ST-III: The Search for Spock

2286 - Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home

2287 - Star Trek V: The Final Frontier

2293 - Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country

2364 - TNG season 1

2365 - TNG season 2

2366 - TNG season 3

2367 - TNG season 4

2368 - TNG season 5

2369 - TNG season 6 / DS9 season 1

2370 - TNG season 7 / DS9 season 2

2371 - DS9 season 3 / VOY season 1 / Star Trek: Generations

2372 - DS9 season 4 / VOY season 2

2373 - DS9 season 5 / VOY season 3 / Star Trek: First Contact

2374 - DS9 season 6 / VOY season 4

2375 - DS9 season 7 / VOY season 5 / Star Trek: Insurrection

2376 - VOY season 6

2377 - VOY season 7

2379 - Star Trek: Nemesis

The Dominion War is set durring DS9's last 2 seasons. Here's a timeline that should help you.

Look at it like this...

Dominion War

2374 - DS9 season 6 / VOY season 4

2375 - DS9 season 7 / VOY season 5 / Star Trek Insurrection

See, the movie ST:FC was set durring DS9's 5th season, while ST:N is set 4 years after DS9 ended, 2 years after VOY got home.

Actually, I don't believe Voyager messed with the timeline. Sure, they had one they had a LOT of time travel adventures, but none on the level of complete damage. The one ones with significant damage are...

"Future's End" - Sol system almost destroyed, Holo-Doc gets his mobile emitter, computer revolution of 20th century happens.

"Endgame" - Future technology brought home to Earth.

So, they messed up once, and then brought home advanced technology. That's nothing compared to Kirk!

DS9: Worf (Does that count?)

YES

I do not condone homosexuallity, nor do I like it, nor do I believe it has any place on televission. I think it's sick and unatural. I'm not even going to go into ethics and spirituallity!

If they do an episode, I can skip it. If it's a story arc, I can not watch for a while. If it becomes anything bigger than that, I may well have to abandon ENTERPRISE.

It's not about hate. It's about being against something man does. It's about upholding one's principles, and it's about not condoning that which I'm against.

Hope I was clear.

Editted: My original message may seemed offensive, so I editted to come off more tactfull. B)