posted
What would have probably happened if the Romulans suceeded in destroying DS9 and closing th e wormhole? Would have war been iminent? Or if the Warbird was destroyed?
posted
It's a good question. Traditionally, the Federation has always been unwilling to go to war with the Romulan Empire. This probably has something to do with their proximity to Earth and the other core worlds of the UFP. However, while they can overlook or diplomatically smooth over things like the Romulan incursion back in "Balance of Terror" or the theft of the Prometheus, destroying an entire station would be a bit harder to sweep under the table. I think there would have to be some sort of reprisal, not necessarily military in nature. Whether or not such a conflict escalated would probably be up to the Romulans. And, seeing as how they attacked DS9 because they really were afraid of the Dominion, and not because they wanted to stick it to Starfleet, I'd imagine the Empire would want to avoid a war as well.
------------------ "20th Century, go to sleep." -- R.E.M.
posted
It should also be noted that the Romulans very nearly got away with it. When evacuating in the runabout, Chief O'Brien did not know who had attacked and destroyed the station. This suggests even the command staff in that timeline did not have time to properly identify the attacker and successfully send out a distress call before the Romulans either jammed communications or destroyed the station's comm systems. It is quite possible that the Romulans could have eliminated all witnesses and blamed the destruction of the station on "natural causes".
After O'Brien returned to tell of the station's mysterious destruction, the command staff probably increased alert levels, so they were able to fight back the Romulans for a short while during O'Brien's final visit to the future. If not for the time-traveling, the station probably could not have put up any resistance at all, and the Romulans could have succeeded without further consequences.
posted
It's interesting though. Apparently, the Prophets have had a plan for Sisko and DS9 all along. They've known of the Dominion War and even warned Bajor about not getting involved. They knew all this would happen.
However, when you think about it, there have been at least two or three times (maybe more) when things could've happened in a VERY different way. Visionary and The Visitor both show us possible timelines in which the War and thus the confrontation in What You Leave Behind never happened. Isn't interesting though that things always worked out so that the Prophet's plans would go ahead just as planned in the timeline that actually continued to exist?
------------------ "A gathering of Angels appeared above my head. They sang to me this song of hope, and this is what they said..." -Styx
posted
In this case, I think (unfortunately) it's the creators of the show who cheat
If Trek had been written like Babylon 5, where the outcome of the series and Sisko's true nature as the Emissary, were all known from the beginning, the plot developments in the last couple of seasons would have been a lot more satisfying.
------------------ "A gathering of Angels appeared above my head. They sang to me this song of hope, and this is what they said..." -Styx
posted
Come now, you know that such a thing is unheard of in Trek - well not untill the last few seasons of DS9 - cause Paramount/Viacom - don't like continuing episodes - cause they like to rerun the show when ever and how ever they like... but shouldn't they realise that if the show isn't good in the first place people aren't going to watch it a second time around.
------------------ "...it might be easier to study ancient societies from distant orbit than it might be to sit next to the Guardian of Forever with a tricorder." - Baloo, January 2000
posted
Thats the problem with every sci-fi show. Take B5 it may had a great story arc and good 5 plan laid out but for the casual viewer its a bit hard to follow if you need to see the last 10-20 episodes. Voyager did this with the Tom Paris in the 2nd season but i heard that did not work too well. However some continuity in star trek episodes would be nice.
------------------ "We set sail on this new sea because their is new knowledge to be gained and new rights to be won" John F Kennedy
posted
No, the producers and he would have mutually decided that he should leave, and he would come back in a third season two-parter where Sisko becomes a Bajoran by...etc. etc.
------------------ Frank's Home Page "We're going to take a five minute break...we'll be back in twenty minutes." - John Linnell
No, I understand that reasoning, but I thought the Tom Paris story arc in the second season, as well as the development of all the secondary characters was a great idea. I thought, "Finally, a Trek show is going to have a plan and get more in depth than just the senior staff." Sadly, it didn't last that long. Having recurring characters with stories is so much more realistic than always continually relying on the senior staff. None of them can ever go bad or they'd have to leave the show eventually!
------------------ "A gathering of Angels appeared above my head. They sang to me this song of hope, and this is what they said..." -Styx
Topic Closed
Printer-friendly view of this topic
