On Sunday, February 3, 2002 at 11:45:04 PM UTC, Alfred Aquino wrote:

On Thu, 24 Jan 2002, Eric F wrote:

Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 06:18:44 GMT
From: Eric F <ericf@mediaone.net>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Dear Doctor was just WRONG! (Spoilers)

This show made me angry. Much of it made no sense and
contradicted itself. The more I think about it, the more angry I get.
I was thinking about doing "Archer is a MURDER!" for a topic, but I resisted. :)
Ok, there is no Prime Directive. We know this. They worked
this in in their not-so-subtle way, practically hammering us over the
head with it for the full episode.
The Valakians were in need, Flox had a cure and held back, and eventually the Capt. decided not to give it to them. Where is the
sense in this? The society was already contaminated, they clearly
knew of other races and warp technology, so what would be the point in
NOT giving it to them? Because the Menk MIGHT only become dominant by withholding a cure? In thousands of years? What the hell is that
about?
Apparently Denobulan physicians have no equivalent to the Hippocratic oath. This is what confuses me the most, that the Capt.
would go along with this. This was no pre-industrial society. The argument should also have been made that since the relationship
between the Valakians and the Menks were symbiotic, the deaths of the Valakians could destroy their whole ecosystem. But this was never mentioned. There was no way to know what "could be" some 2000 years
down the line, but a cure NOW would make a difference.
First they start the series showing how much "not" like Star
Trek "Enterprise" is, by having it be "raw" and "new". Now they go
and do a "Prime Directive" show, without a Prime Directive existing
and I can't but help thinking to myself, "Kirk would have given them
the cure in a minute."
Blech, where do they get their writers, out of a box of Cracker-Jacks?

You forget the argument against providing the cure:

What if, thousands of years ago someone gave the Neanderthals the evolutionary advantage?

Would that have been a "violation" of the "Prime Directive"?
If we today became a result of that act (if we decended from the
Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens were wiped out) would we know the
difference?

Think about it.

And you've got to consider the fact that Kirk and his crew saved the Humpback Whale species in the fourth Star Trek movie The Voyage Home from extinction which in effect violated Archer's rule by the way to communicate with an alien probe of unknown
origin in order to save all life on Earth possibly saving all life in the entire galaxy from extinction. Besides aren't the Menk caveman level? And the Valakian's nuclear level? And isn't it a fact that the Neanderthals never evolved past stone age
tech level?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)