I've been fuming on the Riker issue for days. In fact, it's been an issue since I saw the claims on SB.
It basically can be summed up that "Riker is incompetent, but for some convoluted reason he is XO of the flagship, often commanding it directly, and he gets his own ship later and has been offered commands in the past."
Let's look at the reality of the situation.
From
www.startrek.com
William T. Riker
Executive Officer.
"Decorated five times since graduating 8th in his class from Starfleet Academy, Riker continues to serve with distinction under the command of Captain Jean-Luc Picard...
That career soon accelerated with his posting to the U.S.S. Potemkin, where he received the promotion to Lieutenant Commander and the commendation of "exceptional valor" after leading a heroic rescue mission. Upon completion of his post aboard the Potemkin, Riker was promoted to executive officer aboard the U.S.S. Hood.
This was soon to be followed by the selection of Riker by Jean-Luc Picard to serve aboard the Enterprise as his First Officer.
Throughout his career aboard the Enterprise, Riker has been offered no less than three command posts on other ships. Due to extenuating circumstances and a mixture of both loyalty and desire to someday command the Enterprise, Riker has refused them all. It has been observed by all who served with him that his command style is unconventional, yet highly effective, as demonstrated in encounters with such as the Borg and the Son'a. "
Does this sound like the career of an unsuccessful and incompetent officer? Clearly, Starfleet loves the guy. They've even whitewashed history for him. There is no mention of the transporter accident that cloned Riker and the roles played by the two. And do you know where the "unconventional" comment comes from? It's from when he positioned his ship over the magnetic pole of a planet, something that confuses ST sensors. Apparently, even though that defect was known, Riker was odd for actually using it tactically. Notice how the battle with the Son'a is described as "tactically challenging" by Startrek.com. Despite fan speculation, Riker's performance has clearly been viewed as exemplary in the face of overwhelming odds.
Conclusion:
The debate participants already agree that Riker is incompetent by the standards of a modern military.
Yet Riker is tactically brilliant by the standards of a Starfleet officer. He is highly decorated, and sought after by other Starfleet captains. He is not blamed for the destruction of the E-D and will probably get his own command in ST:X.
Since Riker represents the "cream of the crop" of Starfleet officers, then most starfleet officers, commanding officers in particular, must be grossly incompetent. This is consistent with the demonstrations of intelligence exhibited by Captain Clark Terrell of the U.S.S. Reliant [ST:II], Captain Donald Varley of the U.S.S. Yamato [Contaigion?] (hmm, both bigtime screw-ups are black...hmm...the writers trying to indicate something?) Then we have less than stellar performances all around from such examples as the captain of the U.S.S. Grissom, the original captain of the U.S.S. Excelsior, the nutbar Commodore who let his crew be eaten by the doomsday machine as well as the officer who went after Kirk when M-5 went crazy. Then we have the mental instability of Captain Benjamin Maxwell, and so on. Then there's conspirators such as Admiral Cartwright [black, again], Colonel West, the guy in "Homefront" [DS9], the Admiral in Insurrection - whether or not they were right, they were technically commiting treason! Someone is going to have to list all the deplorable examples of Starfleet captains and other officers.
Stating that Riker is cream-of-the-crop, then, seems to be quite reasonable.
