StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Greetings all.

I've been lurking for a few days now and I had a question that I wondered if you might have some speculation about.

Why is it that the Star Trek universe seems to have simply abandoned land power? I'm not really a Trekkie at all, so I might even be wrong in my initial assessment, but I can think of no instance where the Federation (or anyone else) utilized an army in the conventional sense of the word.

I will freely admit that my perception on the topic is biased, after all, land power is my job and I'm regularly surrounded by the Heinlein-esque We'll Always Need the Grunts sentiment, but it doesn't seem very logical that the Federation (or any AQ power) would simply abandon the Army.

Realistically, I suspect that Rodenberry and Company simply regarded the the combination of the fighter pilot and the naval officer to be much sexier than the army grunt and simply created a world without them. Whatever. That's their perogative...but that's a cop out. So, why in a rational sense would the Federation have abandoned land power? I suppose that Starfleet is capable of providing much more close air support power than I can even imagine, possibly even to the point of rendering troops obsolete, but that seems unlikely to me.

Any thoughts on the matter?

they all took on pascifism.

One reason might be that, since there are no planetary shields in the Star Trek universe, any armies on a planet's surface could be freely blown to pieces from space.

Now, occupying a captured planet is a whole other manner entirely. I have no idea how the Federation would go about doing that.

This belongs in pure Star Trek.

Its possible that the Federation with its transporter technology and the ability to practically drop men where ever they want, has simply replaced the army with ship security personell9at least that's who we see doing the job) and the few times we do see a grunt he is not shown with the best light, See way of the warrior(I think, its the one where Jake runs off and finds a Starfleet guy who stayed behind to let a hopper lift off). The creators of Star Trek seem to try and write the military out of the military, the whole Starfleet is not a military organization thing. Under that kind of phylosiphy, its very hard to justify the exsistance of an Army. After all there is only one thing that an Army can be used for.

Moved to PST.

Whoops...sorry about posting it in the wrong place. I clicked the wrong forum.

Anyway, I hadn't considered transporters. The ability to move both men and materials to any location in a few moments is definately considerable. However, aren't there a ridiculous number of ways to stop transporters?

I guess the absence of an Army is just so anathema to what I know about the concept of war that I simply can't imagine it without. But, like I said...I have a bit of bias.

Armored Goldbar wrote:However, aren't there a ridiculous number of ways to stop transporters?

Well, that's where the ability to blow shit away from space comes in. Transporter inhibitor fucking up your program? *Launches torpedoes* Not anymore. Granted, the Federation's officers are all too big of pussies to actually do anything like that (and there are specific scenarios where it's shit like ore in rocks or ion storms or whatever).

Darth Garden Gnome wrote:

Armored Goldbar wrote:However, aren't there a ridiculous number of ways to stop transporters?

Well, that's where the ability to blow shit away from space comes in. Transporter inhibitor fucking up your program? *Launches torpedoes* Not anymore.

That won't do shit unless you're willing to cause massive civilian casualties. Suppose the enemy has invaded one of your planets? Are you going to bombard any target which is inhibiting your transporter signal? Blast the cities from space in order to clear out the invaders? Think about this for a moment.

Granted, the Federation's officers are all too big of pussies to actually do anything like that (and there are specific scenarios where it's shit like ore in rocks or ion storms or whatever).

Even a manly officer would think twice before annihilating civilians en masse. Sorry, but even with transporters and orbital bombardment, you need fighting men on the ground.

How would you have planned the Iraq invasion? Use satellite photos to figure out where all the enemy troops are and then nuke them? Stop projecting tactics from "Command and Conquer: Generals" onto actual warfare.

Darth Wong wrote:<snip>

Bah, you got me. But C&C:G? I think not. Old school Red Alert is the only way to go.

Sorry, but even with transporters and orbital bombardment, you need fighting men on the ground.

My thoughts exactly. So I wondered if anybody even could reason it out. I suspect that it's just what happens when you have a writing crew more interested in pretty uniforms and special effects than actual warfighting.

There's an episode of DS9 where Bashir and Jake Sisco are trapped on this Feddie colony that comes under attack by the Klingons. Anyways, Jake runs into what appears to be a Feddie soldier. His uniform is different, he mentions he was in a platoon and also mentions some sort of transport called a "Hopper." Not sure if this means that the Federation does have an army, but is underfunded or not as glamorized as Starfleet or not.

Armored Goldbar wrote:

Sorry, but even with transporters and orbital bombardment, you need fighting men on the ground.

My thoughts exactly. So I wondered if anybody even could reason it out. I suspect that it's just what happens when you have a writing crew more interested in pretty uniforms and special effects than actual warfighting.

Its highly possible with the pacifist nature of Starfleet that they just did away with soldiers entirely. Insubordination is almost not even punished in the Fedeqration. Data on the Sutherland is a good example of this. He ignored repeated orders and yet maintained his position. True his hunch(Can a android have those?) was correct and he was able thwart the attempt to breach the blockade, but it was still insubordination. He wasn't punished in any way.

The Grunt appears to considered archaic for some reason. It seams everyone in the Federation is a graduate of Starfleet Acadamy, O'Brian being a noted exception.

It could be that we just haven't seen that aspect of the Federation because Starfleet (the navy) and the ground pounders don't mingle much. Maybe they should do a series on a Federation Infantry unit, something similar to Space Above and Beyond.

One reason why Star Trek writters did not develop a good ground army for trek is probobly budget shortage. Ground warfare special effects and veichles such as tanks, hovercraft require a lot of money to make to look realistic. For a TV show it may be too expensive.

It goes deeper than that. During the Dominion War they made a point of noting clearly that Klingons were used as shock troopers whenever they needed to invade a planet. They clearly lack the ability to invade an enemy planet or retake a conquered planet, so they need to rely on the Klingons for that.

Given the Klingons' abysmal ground warfighting capabilities (their infantry uses handguns and mortars so feeble that Jake Sisko survived a round going off less than a metre away), this really says a lot.

Aya wrote:Not sure if this means that the Federation does have an army, but is underfunded or not as glamorized as Starfleet or not.

AFAIK those Federation soldiers in "Nor the Battle to the Strong" were said to be part of Starfleet.

Darth Wong wrote:It goes deeper than that. During the Dominion War they made a point of noting clearly that Klingons were used as shock troopers whenever they needed to invade a planet. They clearly lack the ability to invade an enemy planet or retake a conquered planet, so they need to rely on the Klingons for that.

I remember one episode in DS9's 6th season which essentially had the Defiant tasked with escorting a Starfleet army convoy (it was the episode with Sisko and Dukat on the surface, with the latter going ka-ka). So the Federation did have an army, the Klingons were probably used as 'marine' equivalents to set up a beach head, while Starfleet took over garrison duties. Then again, the Dominion War was handled so badly I don't really give a shit - why oh why wasn't the Alternate Universe in "Yesterday's Enterprise" the norm? At least they looked cooler.

Incidentally I think this whole notion of 'no more need for ground troops' comes from the airpower school of thought that makes airpower the 'Ultimate Strategic Weapon' - seriously, there were people who thought airpower would be the one and only thing that will decide a war - men like Guilo Douhet honestly thought that airpower would replace everything in war. History has proven that Douhet was wrong, but if you take ICBMs into account airpower is the 'ultimate' strategic weapon.

I'm not saying ST is right, nor that Douhet was right (he wasn't - he completely disregarded the use of interceptors and fighters, and he thought air wars would be completely decided by bombers who would be impervious to AAA - he postulated his thoughts at a time when the technology was new and barely tested *), however, it seems the ST writers conceptualised Starfleet or 'Spacepower' as the 'Ultimate Strategic weapon'. Again, proven false from the show itself - Romulus hoped to conquer Vulcan with a couple thousand troops and a single (supposedly) Warbird to act as orbital/air support, or as a strategic deterrance (don't try to take back Vulcan, you crummy humans - if we can't have it no-one will). No matter what tech is created you will ALWAYS need a man on the ground with a gun to stick a flag on a piece of rock and claim it for his side.

* Incidentally, the use of airpower was devastating in the first Gulf War, which many proponents of the airpower school of thought considered a confirmation of their ideas, but I thought I'd throw that one in as ancilliary information. Douhet was right about a few things - the concept of air supremacy was advocated by him, so he wasn't completely wrong.

Darth Wong wrote:It goes deeper than that. During the Dominion War they made a point of noting clearly that Klingons were used as shock troopers whenever they needed to invade a planet. They clearly lack the ability to invade an enemy planet or retake a conquered planet, so they need to rely on the Klingons for that.

Given the Klingons' abysmal ground warfighting capabilities (their infantry uses handguns and mortars so feeble that Jake Sisko survived a round going off less than a metre away), this really says a lot.

About those ridiculous flour puff mortars, there is a possible face-saving explanation for their febbleness. That would be that the mortars in question are a Klingon weapon designed primarily for use against other Klingons. Klingons appear to have a basic predisposition toward charging into close combat once their dander is up, as all Klingons appear to have anger management issues, and the mortars might actually be a weapon designed to provoke such a reaction: aggravate the enemy until they are driven into the open combat that is the lifeblood of the musclebound goons.

Of course, how compelling that particular explanation is, or why the Klingons would not use a weapon more suited to engaging non-Klingons and turning Starfleet's ground troops into pajama chutney...

Oberleutnant wrote:

Aya wrote:Not sure if this means that the Federation does have an army, but is underfunded or not as glamorized as Starfleet or not.

AFAIK those Federation soldiers in "Nor the Battle to the Strong" were said to be part of Starfleet.

You're right. The fellow who phasered himself in the foot to get shipped away from the front line was referred to as an ensign, a rank really unlikely to be revived for English-speaking dedicated ground forces any time in the future. Jake, in voicing his disbelief over the ensign's actions, noted that he was Starfleet and would have been through hundreds of hours of battle simulations.

Also, the pajama-like uniforms the ground troops wore appeared to be a 'subdued' version of regular Starfleet uniforms: the ensign wore a uniform that was black with a narrow gold stripe across his chest and upper arms, producing less contrast than the huge swatch of gold chest on black that a regular shipboard security uniform would. The trooper leaking his guts out in the crater had a red horizontal stripe instead. At least one of the two luckless troops in the final shootout with two Klingon also had a red stripe.

Patrick Ogaard wrote:About those ridiculous flour puff mortars, there is a possible face-saving explanation for their febbleness. That would be that the mortars in question are a Klingon weapon designed primarily for use against other Klingons. Klingons appear to have a basic predisposition toward charging into close combat once their dander is up, as all Klingons appear to have anger management issues, and the mortars might actually be a weapon designed to provoke such a reaction: aggravate the enemy until they are driven into the open combat that is the lifeblood of the musclebound goons.

Seeing your comrades actually blown to bits instead of harassed somewhat would be a much better provocation.

Darth Wong wrote:
That won't do shit unless you're willing to cause massive civilian casualties. Suppose the enemy has invaded one of your planets? Are you going to bombard any target which is inhibiting your transporter signal? Blast the cities from space in order to clear out the invaders? Think about this for a moment.

Er, mike? Have you seen Insurrection? Fighters swooping down and blasting the inhibitors?

Even a manly officer would think twice before annihilating civilians en masse. Sorry, but even with transporters and orbital bombardment, you need fighting men on the ground.

Pinpoint phaser strikes. Star Trek things are good at hitting things, when they're not moving
Like the Enterprise drilled a hole in rock. It took them two hours to reconfigure the phaser but once the phaser was ready they aimed and hit perfectly.

How would you have planned the Iraq invasion? Use satellite photos to figure out where all the enemy troops are and then nuke them? Stop projecting tactics from "Command and Conquer: Generals" onto actual warfare.

If you could fire weapons like phasers configured to 'drilling mode' so they don't make massive megaton explosions, and moving too fast for people to get out of the way...yes.
With modern weapons, or photon torpedoes...no.

The limited ability to transport sufficent amount of troops in the early years (decades? centuries?) of the AQ-powers, especially at low warp-speeds could have shifted the tactical and strategic doctrine to the, what was it called, "air-superiority-rules"-mindset.

Howedar wrote:Seeing your comrades actually blown to bits instead of harassed somewhat would be a much better provocation.

Well, sure, to your puny human intellect. A Klingon warrior, on the other hand, might consider that to be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. After all, you can't disembowel an opponent with a cunning batleth stroke in honorable and prestige-providing close combat if the initial mortar barrage has already disemboweled and dismembered all likely candidates.

Patrick Ogaard wrote: A Klingon warrior, on the other hand, might consider that to be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. After all, you can't disembowel an opponent with a cunning batleth stroke in honorable and prestige-providing close combat if the initial mortar barrage has already disemboweled and dismembered all likely candidates.

This actually raises more questions than it answers I think.

Disclaimer: I know you were talking about about mortars, but I was gonna bring up Klingons anyway and you did it for me.

Let's say "Ok, the Federation succumbing to the notion that air and presumably space power is enough to replace their army sounds reasonable as we can observe that line of thinking in the 20th century." But, a race like the Klingons, who value hand-to-hand combat should have one hell of an Army! Maybe their ranged weapon development would have suffered, but we should see large advances in personal armor (perhaps not the motorized kind), weaponry, and battlefield mobility (like mechanized infantry). We don't.

Nor do we see any other political group (I'm not going to say species after reading Wong's essay on Sci-fi racism. I didn't know they could produce offspring interchangably and I thank MW for enlightening me.) doing anything to that effect either. In fact, the whole AQ seems to be playing by an arbitrary set of rules that humans thought up four centuries ago.

It just seems...wierd.

Funny, this seems to be one of those instances where TOS differs from latter Trek; we see a cannon ("The Cage"), mortar ("Arena"), tanks ("Patterns of Force", though these belonged to the Ekosians) and get hints about ground units (in "Errand of Mercy", the Organians mentioned stopping both ships and war-machines belonging to both sides, so I guess they were talking about ground units as well)...