It's interference in a non-civilised pre-warp culture for their own aims. Is not such interference prohibited by the terms of the PD?
Also a Starship Captain is supposed to die with his ship before violating the PD yet Kirk violates it in order to save the ship in 'A Taste of Armageddon'. That would appear to be contradicting the terms for the pursuit of staying alive.
There are other instances in which it happens.
In fact, again depending on perspective, the PD is violated in the very first TOS episode it gets mentioned in.
So if it's a rule that can get bent to suit the moment - it can't be the most important one, can it? Because if you do break your no.1 rule to suit - what does that say about your regard for it? That it's optional?
However, what was more intriguing (as I've said IMO forced relocation wasn't to me a compelling plot aspect because it's happened in real history plenty of times) was what you alluded to about bad alliances.
In INS there's a little subtext that the effects of the Dominion war has ravaged the Federation so much that it's in a corner and reduced to having to put aside it's core values and principles in order to get any new allies to come onboard in their side of the war. Simply because it's in a far weaker position than a few years earlier, when they probably wouldn't have touched the Sona with a barge-pole.
I believe Troi or Riker has a line to the effect of 'why are we dealing with these people?' in the film. That side of the sinking of the Federation's principles debate was far more intriguing than the relocation one the film actually went down.
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'
courtesy of Saquist
Last edited by kevin : 08-23-2009 at 04:56 AM.