since Kirk never returned to Ceti Alpha 5 to check on the colony's progress?
https://www.quora.com/In-Star-Trek-2-The-Wrath-Of-Khan-does-Khan-actually-have-a-real-grievance-since-Kirk-never-returned-to-Ceti-Alpha-5-to-check-on-the-colonys-progress
He does, but it's misplaced. The Federation, in some capacity, should have been on top of things like this. Any time anyone is left like that it should fall to some department to ensure they are in contact with them and, you know, aware of planets exploding and orbits shifting. But blaming Kirk specifically was not correct, and anyone with his elevated intelligence should have been able to understand that concept.
Still, love the film and it won't stop me from enjoying it. Trek is full of little things like that but at least it's nowhere near the brain-dead level of Discovery.
I sorta disagree. I'm not sure what Federation law would say on the subject, but morally speaking I think Kirk was already above-and-beyond the call of duty. If he went eye-for-an-eye, pure justice, no mercy, on Khan, Kirk would have vapourised him. Seeing as Khan tried to murder Kirk and the Enterprise's crew, hijack the ship, and go off to do who-knows-what kind of megalomaniacal shenanigans all over the galaxy.
In response, Kirk gave Khan a world in which to live and thrive. It isn't Kirk's fault that the world went to pot, and it's not Kirk's responsibility to check up on Khan and co. I don't think it's the Federation's responsibility, either.
Put it this way: Khan fought as a psychopathic tyrant until the wars he started turned sour, forcing him into a self-imposed exile. When awakened and shown hospitality, he picks another fight with his gracious hosts. What is he owed in return?
No.
1. Kirk marooned Khan on a reasonably pleasant planet that went bad due to freak occurrences. In other words: this was not predictable.
2. Kirk was not responsible for checking up on Khan.
3. Khan tried to murder all three-hundred+ crew members and hijack the ship. After that, he likely would have gone on to start wars and murder more people. Kirk's response - marooning Khan and his cohorts on a habitable world - was downright beatific.
4. If Khan were Kirk and Kirk were Khan, Khan would have spaced James T. faster than you could say "Energize". He would have displayed no mercy. Yet, he expects monthly/yearly visits?
Khan has only himself to blame.
The Federation should have had the death penalty for Khan.
shareI get the feeling the Federation doesn't have the death penalty. In this case it certainly would have saved them some big grief, though. But when Picard, one of the exemplars of Federation philosophy and outlook, risks his whole ship being destroyed because he won't commit genocide on a race of nanobots until he's certain they aren't actually a life form and/or he has exhausted every other option, I somehow doubt they have the death penalty.
shareThe Federation DID have the death penalty, in TOS at least. It was forbidden to visit the Talosian system on pain of death. It was mentioned in the first pilot episode, The Menagerie, and featured again in the main series when Spock risked his life to return a disfigured Pike to the Talosian system.
I stand corrected by you; my hat is off.
It must be rare, though. Although, if the reason for "death if you step into the Talosian system," is because it might render a ship into the hands of the keepers of the menagerie, it's not a stretch to imagine that attempted takeover of a Federation vessel might warrant the same penalty. This would get tricky with interstellar politics, though, and might get murkier since Khan isn't really from even the same time.
Either way, marooning was a more-than-fair move on Kirk's part, and it's not Jim's fault that paradise had an expiry date.
How the Wrath of Khan Is Actually Kirk's Fault
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XELVi4GTmAw
This guy is very funny and clever. I like the video and it's fun. But I disagree with his conclusions.
His first point: Kirk shouldn't have let Khan access the computer. Fair enough, but even Steve Shives points out that Kirk didn't know Khan's wrathful past (and future) at the time, so that's not a big problem.
Next, he says Kirk shouldn't have marooned Khan and his cohorts on the planet, but I'm not sure why mercy is bad or exile is a bad idea with super-crazies like Khan, et al. It's unlikely they could build a ship capable of leaving the planet and traveling to the Federation AND that would threaten anybody, right? So why not? Shives implies that Kirk's judgement was wrong or out-of-line with Federation jurisprudence (unilateral decision), but do we know this? Many episodes of Trek imply that deep space star captains are granted a lot of latitude when dealing with judgements on their missions. They'd have to be because of the vast unknown they are encountering. It seems like this was Kirk's prerogative.
As for the fallout, again, I'll point out that what he does is simultaneously just and merciful, and that Kirk has *no obligation whatsoever* to check up on Khan.
Now, with Shives' points about the themes, I'm right on-board. It is about Kirk's past catching up with him and Kirk being forced to face consequences. But I can't agree that Khan is Kirk's fault. Khan is Khan's fault. He tries to take the Enterprise, he seeks revenge. Kirk responds, and perhaps not optimally, but far from poorly, and I disagree that Kirk's decisions are short-sighted. I do agree with Shives about Kirk's failings as a father and in-general, but not with Khan specifically.
Of course, what makes Khan a great villain is that we understand why he's mad and attributes blame to Kirk. It's not that justified in my opinion, but it makes sense to Khan.
Khan has only himself to blame.
Yup. Repeatedly, in fact. He got several chances to make good and he always took olive branches and used them to slap people. He was on the wrong side of a eugenics war, was left to drift in stasis (not killed), and when revived and given hospitality on the Enterprise he tried to hijack it. On and on with that behaviour.
shareHe does...because the movie needs him to. (i.e. Movie Logic)
shareYou have to remember that the galaxy of Star Trek was metaphorically the world of the 18th century. The Ceti Alpha system was far from anything, far from the beaten path. Did the English navy go check up on the welfare of the mutineers on Pitcairn Island? (I actually don't know, but it seems unlikely).
share