To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest)

My personal position is that Starfleet shouldn't interfere in those matters, yes @SynchronizedWritersBlock . But that doesn't mean that, in and of itself, my proposal will divest Starfleet from those issues. We will still inevitably conduct diplomacy, if only because we're usually the ones doing first contact. There will always be an odd "incident" where Starfleet captain will involve themselves in some internal matter.

However, these events aren't the rule - or at least, should not be the rule. And a situation that requires deployment of a peacekeeping force for any significant duration of time will likely be beyond any single starship. There have already been argument that with the CBZ and fire-watching against Cardassians we will be spread thin; an integrated Peacekeeping force will require us to spread our attention even more. It's a specialization issue. Peacekeeping is a complicated issue, or at least that's how I view it; thus I think everyone would be best served if this was its own thing.

And frankly, we provided command elements in Syndicate campaign precisely because such third institution did not exist. I'd expect that if we had an independent Peacekeeping force, Starfleet's direct involvement in that mission would be significantly smaller. At any rate, nowhere in that option does it say that we will be cut out from doing diplomacy or becoming involved. If that's how things worked, we'd probably have an extra update every quarter featuring nothing but Starfleet CnC getting hit with a rolled newspaper by the head of FDS. Repeatedly.

No, you know what? This shit is going to just keep going so long as N'Gir is president.

[X][CARGO] Bitter-end opposition (may require resignation)
[X][PEACE] Bitter-end opposition (May require resignation)

Let's see her presidency deal with the second Commander of Starfleet to resign within a year.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes, President.

Simon_Jester said:

He even SAID " (if you give me a eat-cake/have-cake write-in it will go badly)," although that was in the context of the logistics vote.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Ugh you should get around to reading the existing write-ins. There are some unnecessarily detailed ones, but there are some reasonable ones too that are nowhere near "eat-cake/have-cake" level.

"Mix of Starfleet's Auxiliary Shipyard expansion and assigning Starfleet general purpose shipyard berths, supplemented by Member yards like now", in particular, I can see N'Gir having no objection too, because it's basically a non-write-in option, plus enshrining what we've been earmarking in our shipbuild plans before: reserving our normal berths for auxiliary ship builds.

---

Regarding the whole independent vs Starfleet one, well, Iron Wolf said it more eloquently that I can:

Iron Wolf said:

I really don't think a Federation Army/Peacekeeper Corps/Gendarme is really the solution to this problem. I'm not sure why everyone says, on one hand, they're worried about the Peacekeepers being used wrong, and then on the other thinks it'd be a good idea not to have them in our control and potentially having another Federal-level organization come along and fuck up our negotiations.

Like you think the problem is bad enough with the FDS? Imagine all the concern about reflexively using the peacekeepers, but now bear in mind they could be under the control of an NPC President and there's no way to vote on their deployment.

Part of Starfleet's job is increasingly to help keep the peace internally to the Federation. Arguably, this has always been a part of the job. Ever since the core four have been land-locked and we've formed an array of borderzones while still keeping D requirements tight in very old home sectors, we've been admitting Starfleet is not just about external defense and frontier exploration. We have an important domestic duty as well, and I simply do not get why we are shying away from equipping ourselves for what is going to be a major, major part of our work going forward.

I honestly view the peacekeepers as being very complementary to the EC and to our mission in general, in that they can help stabilize the frontier and new members that our EC have been putting us into contact with and then doing a really good job of diplomancing. They're basically there to be our go-to for helping restore civil order, which it sounds like we'll need a lot of.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Godwinson said:

No, you know what? This shit is going to just keep going so long as N'Gir is president.

[X][CARGO] Bitter-end opposition (may require resignation)
[X][PEACE] Bitter-end opposition (May require resignation)

Let's see her presidency deal with the second Commander of Starfleet to resign within a year.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes, President.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Cue the President accusing us of trying to support the Expansionists and Pacifists. Which is not entirely wrong. Hmm.

*Sulu bows in front of a holographic projector. A large image of what is clearly Rob Langford wearing a hood appears.*
Sulu: "Master, I have done your bidding."
Langford: "Good Admiral, good. Soon the Pacifist-Expansionist coalition shall rule the Council once again! I shall send my apprentice to your office to discuss the next phase of our plan."
*The image of Stesk suddenly appears next to Langford*
Stesk: "This is highly illogical. I have been doing this far longer than you, I should be the master."
Langford: "Damnit Stesk, can't you play along for once?"

I'm not sure how I suddenly came up with this.

Alastor Mobius Toth said:

My personal position is that Starfleet shouldn't interfere in those matters, yes @SynchronizedWritersBlock . But that doesn't mean that, in and of itself, my proposal will divest Starfleet from those issues. We will still inevitably conduct diplomacy, if only because we're usually the ones doing first contact. There will always be an odd "incident" where Starfleet captain will involve themselves in some internal matter.

However, these events aren't the rule - or at least, should not be the rule. And a situation that requires deployment of a peacekeeping force for any significant duration of time will likely be beyond any single starship. There have already been argument that with the CBZ and fire-watching against Cardassians we will be spread thin; an integrated Peacekeeping force will require us to spread our attention even more. It's a specialization issue. Peacekeeping is a complicated issue, or at least that's how I view it; thus I think everyone would be best served if this was its own thing.

And frankly, we provided command elements in Syndicate campaign precisely because such third institution did not exist. I'd expect that if we had an independent Peacekeeping force, Starfleet's direct involvement in that mission would be significantly smaller. At any rate, nowhere in that option does it say that we will be cut out from doing diplomacy or becoming involved. If that's how things worked, we'd probably have an extra update every quarter featuring nothing but Starfleet CnC getting hit with a rolled newspaper by the head of FDS. Repeatedly.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

These events absolutely are the rule - Starfleet is relied upon by members and affiliates both as a diplomatic and policing force, both inside and outside our borders. I'm willing to bet you can find internal diplomacy 90% of the time in every set of quarterly captain's logs, at least the ones since we started getting the event rate we do now.

Arguing that this shouldn't be the rule is to argue that we need to make massive changes to Starfleet's hat. IC that means a large role shift that undoes much of the indoctrination of Starfleet purpose, which would probably start at the academy and work its way upwards. Putting it in from top down would mean pushing massive changes through the Council and forcing many of our officers out of the service. People like Demora Sulu, whose thing is specifically internal diplomacy. OOC, that kind of change would fundamentally change the kind of game we're playing here. I'll note that the combination of internal and external diplomacy were a regular thing on every Star Trek show other than Voyager. It's part of what makes the events of this quest feel so quintessentially Star Trek, and I strongly object to a view that wishes to kill it.

We do already conduct what amounts to peacekeeping in space. Regularly, even. It's not a role shift so much as a role extension.


An independent peacekeeping force would still require Starfleet combat ships to support them, so we'd still end up being spread a bit no matter what. It is materially no different in the necessary requirement from our regular ships. As you yourself argue, we would still be involved in any dispute in significant ways.

OneirosTheWriter said:

The President grimaces and waves a hand. "This meeting was where aimed to read you in. There was a consulting process planned. My team and I were busy preparing the plan so we didn't have something half-baked to hand you to cause yet another ruction for Starfleet brass to take to the other parties and undermine me again."

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I can definitely appreciate someone who wants to get their ducks in a row instead of going off half-cocked.

OneirosTheWriter said:

She lets you digest that for a moment, then continues. "I'm not surprise the Hawks were the ones to find out and spill."

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I'm going to enjoy watching her pluck some Hawk feathers; it's going to be a thing of beauty.

OneirosTheWriter said:

*prays this doesn't go completely pearshaped*

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Given that @Alex pears was the first person to give your post a 'like' rating, I'd say it's too late.

Now, for my votes! We need more slipways, more cargo and freight hauling capacity, and more support ships for construction projects and such. We're also very nervous about the reliability of dudes with guns. However, a Federation-level body that operates large numbers of starships would make Starfleet redundant. So:

[X][CARGO] Look to heavily expand Starfleet's Auxiliary Shipyard production
-[X][AUX] By itself

[X][PEACE] Place under Starfleet Tactical

[X][GEAR] Should be more in line with Caitian Frontier Police

[X][SIZE] Should be smaller, 3 battalions

[X][SUPPORT] Minimal organic assets (no industrial requirement)

Once we have declared them to be politically reliable, we can consider expanding them with greater means of personnel transport.

Steven Kodaly said:

Given that @Alex pears was the first person to give your post a 'like' rating, I'd say it's too late.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Thanks I was waiting for the first person to make a pear joke.

SynchronizedWritersBlock said:

These events absolutely are the rule - Starfleet is relied upon by members and affiliates both as a diplomatic and policing force, both inside and outside our borders. I'm willing to bet you can find internal diplomacy 90% of the time in every set of quarterly captain's logs, at least the ones since we started getting the event rate we do now.

Arguing that this shouldn't be the rule is to argue that we need to make massive changes to Starfleet's hat. IC that means a large role shift that undoes much of the indoctrination of Starfleet purpose, which would probably start at the academy and work its way upwards. Putting it in from top down would mean pushing massive changes through the Council and forcing many of our officers out of the service. People like Demora Sulu, whose thing is specifically internal diplomacy. OOC, that kind of change would fundamentally change the kind of game we're playing here. I'll note that the combination of internal and external diplomacy were a regular thing on every Star Trek show other than Voyager. It's part of what makes the events of this quest feel so quintessentially Star Trek, and I strongly object to a view that wishes to kill it.

We do already conduct what amounts to peacekeeping in space. Regularly, even. It's not a role shift so much as a role extension.


An independent peacekeeping force would still require Starfleet combat ships to support them, so we'd still end up being spread a bit no matter what. It is materially no different in the necessary requirement from our regular ships. As you yourself argue, we would still be involved in any dispute in significant ways.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I disagree with this.

There's no indication that somehow majority of our internal diplomacy goes through Starfleet - if that was the case, then the entire point of Council and the Diplomatic service is moot. The internal that we know of happens in the logs, because that is what we're directly involved, and hence have knowledge on. However, I have never gotten the impression that it somehow involves all of our internal affairs.

Moreover, you can make the argument that the Starfleet is forced to respond precisely because we have no Peacekeeping forces that could handle it. Furthermore, there have been repeated cases where Starfleet has been specifically unable to respond to these situations; if we had Peacekeepers, they could have responded to these events, and had they failed it would be on them, not us.

I also strongly disagree that Peacekeeping force should have combat ships. That would only make sense if we were going to make them a full combat force, to which I object and will continue to fight against. If there is a situation where they uniquely need to make use of a combat vessel then fine, I am willing to take the hit and have to lend them something. But fundamentally, they shouldn't need more than the basic capacity to go from point A to B and to deploy and recover their forces.


You're also conflating my own opinion with what the option actually means. If you're so concerned with our ability to do internal diplomacy...well, I fail to see how this removes it? Even if it had been some seekrit ambition of mine to cripple this aspect of quest as you so imply, creating Independent Peacekeeping Force as it stands would not work to that effect, because it does not invalidate or magically forbids our involvement. If local forces of Starfleet solve particular event...well, good on them, I guess? But if solution isn't permanent, or we require larger action, or Starfleet is simply unavailable, the Council dispatches the peacekeepers. Especially since, you know, peacekeeping is a bit different from actually responding to captain's log events. Hell, frequent complaint against any Star Trek except DS9 is that Starfleet just bolts from place to place, and never has to deal with larger consequence of their actions on-screen.

I also doubt that Peacekeeper Corps would actually require Starfleet support on most of their missions; so that "support" would be rather conditional.

Like, I just don't see the same issues as you do.

Alastor Mobius Toth said:

There's no indication that somehow majority of our internal diplomacy goes through Starfleet - if that was the case, then the entire point of Council and the Diplomatic service is moot. The internal that we know of happens in the logs, because that is what we're directly involved, and hence have knowledge on. However, I have never gotten the impression that it somehow involves all of our internal affairs.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Previous thread theorising concluded that the FDS is also responsible for internal diplomacy; Starfleet handles some exceptional cases that the FDS is not suited to take.

Hostages, for instance.

Godwinson said:

Let's see her presidency deal with the second Commander of Starfleet to resign within a year.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes, President.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

"PRESIDENT N'GIR HEADS OFF ANOTHER ROGERS
'Thank god we nipped that in the bud;' says Councilor, after Sulu opposes Presidential mandate.'"

I think we'll be the only ones to win stupid prizes in this event, y'all.

Like this is the fundamental nature of 'Not an Empire Quest' -- we are not the total masters of our own destiny. As Sulu noted, the President is more dangerous to him remaining in his position than the Cardassians. To think the Council won't claw us back if we get to out of bounds -- or that the electorate won't go for people who promise to -- is pure fantasy. I'd like to avoid that Bad End thanks.

Guys, has anyone thought of possibly splitting up how heavily armed the group is?

Basically a write-in something like the following (as I'm pretty sure I've messed it up somewhere)

[ ][PEACE] Suggest an independent body
-[ ] Federation Rangers. Operate their own infrastructure, but restricted in ship classes to minimally armed transport ships. If other ships required, conduct a combined operation with Star Fleet. (Basically, something that means the Rangers can get around on their own, but if they need to enter defended territory, they'd better have some star fleet ships by their side or they are in trouble. Aka, it's hard to conduct a coup when your transport ships get destroyed by Starfleet on approach)

[ ][GEAR] Write-In
-[ ] One battalion shall be a Heavy Battalion and should be equipped more in line with MACOs (war-fighting capacity)
-[ ] Two battalions shall be Light Battalions and should be equipped more in line with Andorian Peacekeepers
-[ ] All other battalions should be more in line with Caitian Frontier Police

[ ][SIZE] As Proposed, 9 battalions

[ ][SUPPORT] Write-in
-[ ] Heavy Battalion shall be equipped with Runabouts and Shuttles. Other battalions shall have Groundcars and Aerobus attachments at most.

Would this work out? It basically gives them a bit of bite, enough to deal with a situation if it ever gets out of hand, but otherwise it's just enough to carry out their duties. The 'Light Battalions' are the ones that go into situations where the situation isn't actually open fighting, and at other times they can probably do things like act as embassy guards for the Federation, or back up the FDS. If the situation escalates, then they call in the main forces of the Rangers. And if the situation escalates even further, well, they've got the Heavy Battalion which will either stop the problem in it's tracks, or at least slow it down long enough/serve as an adequate alarm bell to allow the Federation as a whole to start to respond.

Alastor Mobius Toth said:

I disagree with this.

There's no indication that somehow majority of our internal diplomacy goes through Starfleet - if that was the case, then the entire point of Council and the Diplomatic service is moot. The internal that we know of happens in the logs, because that is what we're directly involved, and hence have knowledge on. However, I have never gotten the impression that it somehow involves all of our internal affairs.

Moreover, you can make the argument that the Starfleet is forced to respond precisely because we have no Peacekeeping forces that could handle it. Furthermore, there have been repeated cases where Starfleet has been specifically unable to respond to these situations; if we had Peacekeepers, they could have responded to these events, and had they failed it would be on them, not us.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I'm not at all implying that all our internal affairs go through us. I'm saying that it is specifically part of our responsibility to deal with internal affairs right now. Those affairs also go through the FDS, through the Council, through local diplomats and governments, but we are currently obligated to take on those affairs whenever they cross our desk. You can argue to change that, but it's the order of the day right now. There have even been cases where Starfleet has been requested to deal with a specific internal matter, like the current Caldonian affair.

Alastor Mobius Toth said:

I also strongly disagree that Peacekeeping force should have combat ships. That would only make sense if we were going to make them a full combat force, to which I object and will continue to fight against. If there is a situation where they uniquely need to make use of a combat vessel then fine, I am willing to take the hit and have to lend them something. But fundamentally, they shouldn't need more than the basic capacity to go from point A to B and to deploy and recover their forces.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Covering their ships in a conflict zone where one of the parties may have space-borne assets isn't really too much. Something as simple as suicide shuttle ramming, or ad-hoc armed cargo, would require Starfleet cover. And we've seen both those things, outside of the Syndicate campaign, even. I agree that they shouldn't be a full combat force, but losing a passenger ship full of peacekeepers because we weren't willing to front a cruiser to help them out would be awful. And since you agree with me here, then we aren't disagreeing - they will require us to deploy ships to help them out from time to time. So to take it back to your original point, how exactly will making them part of Starfleet require more of our combat ships than making them independent? That makes zero sense and is contradicted by your other statements.

Alastor Mobius Toth said:

You're also conflating my own opinion with what the option actually means. If you're so concerned with our ability to do internal diplomacy...well, I fail to see how this removes it? Even if it had been some seekrit ambition of mine to cripple this aspect of quest as you so imply, creating Independent Peacekeeping Force as it stands would not work to that effect, because it does not invalidate or magically forbids our involvement. If local forces of Starfleet solve particular event...well, good on them, I guess? But if solution isn't permanent, or we require larger action, or Starfleet is simply unavailable, the Council dispatches the peacekeepers. Especially since, you know, peacekeeping is a bit different from actually responding to captain's log events.

I also doubt that Peacekeeper Corps would actually require Starfleet support on most of their missions; so that "support" would be rather conditional.

Like, I just don't see the same issues as you do.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I've repeatedly said that Starfleet is already a peacekeeping organization, that we already take on peacekeeping duties with regularity. Every single year, often every quarter, in fact. You responded by mounting objections based on your opinion that we shouldn't be taking on these things. If you wish to object on grounds that don't include that opinion, then do so. But you haven't.

Since we already take on peacekeeping duties, I feel that it is more natural and will result in a better organization to take these new peacekeepers under the Starfleet umbrella.

Pyro Hawk said:

Guys, has anyone thought of possibly splitting up how heavily armed the group is?

Basically a write-in something like the following (as I'm pretty sure I've messed it up somewhere)

[ ][PEACE] Suggest an independent body
-[ ] Federation Rangers. Operate their own infrastructure, but restricted in ship classes to minimally armed transport ships. If other ships required, conduct a combined operation with Star Fleet. (Basically, something that means the Rangers can get around on their own, but if they need to enter defended territory, they'd better have some star fleet ships by their side or they are in trouble. Aka, it's hard to conduct a coup when your transport ships get destroyed by Starfleet on approach)

[ ][GEAR] Write-In
-[ ] One battalion shall be a Heavy Battalion and should be equipped more in line with MACOs (war-fighting capacity)
-[ ] Two battalions shall be Light Battalions and should be equipped more in line with Andorian Peacekeepers
-[ ] All other battalions should be more in line with Caitian Frontier Police

[ ][SIZE] As Proposed, 9 battalions

[ ][SUPPORT] Write-in
-[ ] Heavy Battalion shall be equipped with Runabouts and Shuttles. Other battalions shall have Groundcars and Aerobus attachments at most.

Would this work out? It basically gives them a bit of bite, enough to deal with a situation if it ever gets out of hand, but otherwise it's just enough to carry out their duties. The 'Light Battalions' are the ones that go into situations where the situation isn't actually open fighting, and at other times they can probably do things like act as embassy guards for the Federation, or back up the FDS. If the situation escalates, then they call in the main forces of the Rangers. And if the situation escalates even further, well, they've got the Heavy Battalion which will either stop the problem in it's tracks, or at least slow it down long enough/serve as an adequate alarm bell to allow the Federation as a whole to start to respond.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It's implied that they scale to deal with the situation.

Besides, there's little that the heavy battalion can solve that T'Lorel can't.

[X][PEACE] Suggest an independent body
- [X][NEW] Organic Infrastructure

It seems we are going to have it, and I want no part in it.

[X][CARGO] Look to heavily expand Starfleet's Auxiliary Shipyard production
-[X][AUX] By itself

[X][PEACE] Suggest an independent body
- [X][NEW] Organic Infrastructure

Hazard said:

[X][CARGO] Look to heavily expand Starfleet's Auxiliary Shipyard production
-[X][AUX] By itself
--[X][AUX] Surge supplemented by other Member yards if that is insufficient may be considered.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I really don't get this vote. Do you want to do it all alone or do you want assistance from member yards? You contradict yourself. Pick one or the other.

Edit: I still don't understand why so many people are voting "by itself ". Haven't seen anyone justifying it.

Briefvoice said:

I really don't get this vote. Do you want to do it all alone or do you want assistance from member yards? You contradict yourself. Pick one or the other.

Edit: I still don't understand why so many people are voting "by itself ". Haven't seen anyone justifying it.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It's simple.
Primary method of logistics production expansion for Starfleet is expanding Auxiliary Shipyard production.
If that's insufficient, supplementing from other Member yards may be considered.

Hazard said:

It's simple.
Primary method of logistics production expansion for Starfleet is expanding Auxiliary Shipyard production.
If that's insufficient, supplementing from other Member yards may be considered.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Why not Nix's vote?

Hazard said:

It's simple.
Primary method of logistics production expansion for Starfleet is expanding Auxiliary Shipyard production.
If that's insufficient, supplementing from other Member yards may be considered.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

In that case there's no need to say by itself. The wording of the member yard option already says that it will only go into effect if our expansion isn't enough

SynchronizedWritersBlock said:

I'm not at all implying that all our internal affairs go through us. I'm saying that it is specifically part of our responsibility to deal with internal affairs right now. Those affairs also go through the FDS, through the Council, through local diplomats and governments, but we are currently obligated to take on those affairs whenever they cross our desk. You can argue to change that, but it's the order of the day right now. There have even been cases where Starfleet has been requested to deal with a specific internal matter, like the current Caldonian affair.



Covering their ships in a conflict zone where one of the parties may have space-borne assets isn't really too much. Something as simple as suicide shuttle ramming, or ad-hoc armed cargo, would require Starfleet cover. And we've seen both those things, outside of the Syndicate campaign, even. I agree that they shouldn't be a full combat force, but losing a passenger ship full of peacekeepers because we weren't willing to front a cruiser to help them out would be awful. And since you agree with me here, then we aren't disagreeing - they will require us to deploy ships to help them out from time to time. So to take it back to your original point, how exactly will making them part of Starfleet require more of our combat ships than making them independent? That makes zero sense and is contradicted by your other statements.



I've repeatedly said that Starfleet is already a peacekeeping organization, that we already take on peacekeeping duties with regularity. Every single year, often every quarter, in fact. You responded by mounting objections based on your opinion that we shouldn't be taking on these things. If you wish to object on grounds that don't include that opinion, then do so. But you haven't.

Since we already take on peacekeeping duties, I feel that it is more natural and will result in a better organization to take these new peacekeepers under the Starfleet umbrella.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

No, you stated that we handle "90%" of internal affairs of the Federation, which was frankly ridiculous. And yes, if we are specifically requested to handle an issue, we gotta do it. But then, what's the problem here? That the Peacekeeping Corps will lighten our workload? I frankly don't see how an Independent organization is a problem. "We are doing all these extra things, so instead of having an agency specifically to deal with this, we are going to keep doing it because....". Well, why, exactly?

It will require more ships, because we will need to move the troops, then move heavy iron to escort and then keep it supplied. By keeping it independent, we're crossing off two points from the list, especially if you're going with organic transport/build capacity. Leaving the defense to us. And I don't think that Peacekeepers will require protection during every mission. Yes, they'd need Starfleet escort in Orion space. But not every mission is going to be against an opponent like that. We're also again going to have to shell out officers to coordinate the entire circus. Wouldn't it be better if an independent agency already trained people to do that?

You are assuming that I'd have Starfleet escort them on every deployment. I wouldn't, because not every deployment would warrant it. Like, it is going to be force that specifically handle "groundside" low-intensity conflict. Syndicate was anything but low-intensity. And all the same, I doubt that Peacekeeper transports would be as vulnerable as ordinary trading haulers.

I am honestly lost by your last point. Again, you insist that peacekeeping is something we did...therefore we should continue to do it? Okay, irregardless of what I think about that, that sounds like an inefficient use of resources. Yes, Starfleet mediates in conflicts occasionally, but it also doesn't arguably do peacekeeping, because those ships then fly away. We aren't talking about something that gets solved in one TV episode; we're talking about situations that will require permanent assignment of specialists for an extended period of time, tied to particular planets, stations, even cities, that will then do very specific set of jobs that will usually go beyond what a mediating captain will do. These people set things up. Those people make it stick. I don't think there's actually a lot of overlap with Starfleet there. The people we send to Caldonians are going to stay there for a while.

And at what point do we say enough is enough? We are already doing science, exploration, engineering, combat, and mess with diplomacy for good measure. Now you're arguing to make a very specific-use, environment-tied department of Starfleet that we will have to then essentially bankroll and drag across the cosmos. By this metric, we should be arguing to abolish the FDS while we're at it too, after all we're already handling parts of diplomacy, so why shouldn't we handle all of it too? Does FDS existing invalidates character with high diplomacy scores by the way? Because I don't think so. And neither I think that people like Sulu Jnr. will be out of a job just because we have a specialized, separate agency.

Like, the really, really short TL;DR here is, "why do you want us to do more work? Which most people don't want?"
And given the in-universe split on the issue, I disagree that it is indeed a fundamental Starfleet thing, and not result of circumstances.

And...you know, at this point we're just talking over each other. I can respect your position and agree to disagree, but at this point I think our positions are firmly made.

Alastor Mobius Toth said:

No, you stated that we handle "90%" of internal affairs of the Federation, which was frankly ridiculous.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

No, I said that 90% of our quarters contain at least one internal diplomacy event that we handle.

I just had a thought. Are the Freighters and Cargo Ships Armed? We might want to up their armaments for when we need to provide Orbit to Surface fire if they are. If not we should design one that is.

Joshrand1982 said:

I just had a thought. Are the Freighters and Cargo Ships Armed? We might want to up their armaments for when we need to provide Orbit to Surface fire if they are. If not we should design one that is.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Nope and nope.

Let the independent Peacekeeper Corps consider that question.

[X][PEACE] Write-in: Ranger Corps
-[X][STAR] The Starfleet Ranger Corps will be a new commanddirectly reporting to Commander, Starfleet.
-[X][STAR] Rear Admiral Michael Thuir will be its first commander.
[X][GEAR] Should be more in line with Caitian Frontier Police
[X][SIZE] Should be smaller, 3 battalions
[X][SUPPORT] Write-in: Metric Tonnes of Pennies
-[X] Design a new Fast Transport class suitable for transporting small and bulk cargo, as well as people.
-[X] Runabouts and Shuttles
-[X] Use Sol's Heavy Industrial Complex for production

Alastor Mobius Toth said:

But then, what's the problem here? That the Peacekeeping Corps will lighten our workload? I frankly don't see how an Independent organization is a problem. "We are doing all these extra things, so instead of having an agency specifically to deal with this, we are going to keep doing it because....". Well, why, exactly?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I don't see it as extra things at all, I see it as things that are fundamentally part of our raison d'être. We exist to take care of the obligations that you call extra. They are part and parcel with why there is a Starfleet.

Alastor Mobius Toth said:

It will require more ships, because we will need to move the troops, then move heavy iron to escort and then keep it supplied. By keeping it independent, we're crossing off two points from the list, especially if you're going with organic transport/build capacity. Leaving the defense to us. And I don't think that Peacekeepers will require protection during every mission. Yes, they'd need Starfleet escort in Orion space. But not every mission is going to be against an opponent like that. We're also again going to have to shell out officers to coordinate the entire circus. Wouldn't it be better if an independent agency already trained people to do that?

You are assuming that I'd have Starfleet escort them on every deployment. I wouldn't, because not every deployment would warrant it. Like, it is going to be force that specifically handle "groundside" low-intensity conflict. Syndicate was anything but low-intensity. And all the same, I doubt that Peacekeeper transports would be as vulnerable as ordinary trading haulers.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I'm voting for an option that specifies organic transport and equipment, but the Federation is going to be building that regardless of who administers it. The quantity of organic support doesn't change whether it's with us or independent. It is a net zero between the two options.

I did not make such an assumption. Kindly read what I said: where combat starships are needed, the need will be the same regardless of if the peacekeepers are with Starfleet or not. Overall the support needs, both in logistics and in starship support, are the same no matter what the command structure is. The Federation will be providing some type of appropriations for this no matter what; the options show that this will be part and parcel with the force itself. The stance you're taking that they would be different is nonsense.

Alastor Mobius Toth said:

I am honestly lost by your last point. Again, you insist that peacekeeping is something we did...therefore we should continue to do it? Okay, irregardless of what I think about that, that sounds like an inefficient use of resources. Yes, Starfleet mediates in conflicts occasionally, but it also doesn't arguably do peacekeeping, because those ships then fly away. We aren't talking about something that gets solved in one TV episode; we're talking about situations that will require permanent assignment of specialists for an extended period of time, tied to particular planets, stations, even cities, that will then do very specific set of jobs that will usually go beyond what a mediating captain will do. These people set things up. Those people make it stick. I don't think there's actually a lot of overlap with Starfleet there. The people we send to Caldonians are going to stay there for a while.

And at what point do we say enough is enough? We are already doing science, exploration, engineering, combat, and mess with diplomacy for good measure. Now you're arguing to make a very specific-use, environment-tied department of Starfleet that we will have to then essentially bankroll and drag across the cosmos. By this metric, we should be arguing to abolish the FDS while we're at it too, after all we're already handling parts of diplomacy, so why shouldn't we handle all of it too? Does FDS existing invalidates character with high diplomacy scores by the way? Because I don't think so. And neither I think that people like Sulu Jnr. will be out of a job just because we have a specialized, separate agency.

Like, the really, really short TL;DR here is, "why do you want us to do more work? Which most people don't want?"

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I disagree with your argument entirely. We do not just fly away; we are permanently garrisoned. Upholding the agreements and laws of the Federation is what we already do, whether those are basic space police work or keeping parties what hate each other from violence. We are garrisoned for this purpose already. That is a fundamental part of why were have a fleet in space at all. It is just as important as exploration, science, or first contacts. We do not get to fly away; we are stuck with every problem we do not help fully resolve (assisting or with the assistance of the rest of the Federation's organs).

The idea that we somehow don't already do permanent, long-term conflict management, extraordinary policing, or deescalation between groups with serious violent disagreements is patently untrue. It is actually a fundamental duty that Starfleet have undertook from even before there was a Federation.