Did Sheridan Misuse His Authority?

[QMCO5]

I believe Sheridan had the moral authority to initiate a campaign to remove Clark, but recently as I watched “No Surrender, No Retreat” I wondered about Sheridan’s legal authority to involve the Rangers and the White Star fleet in that campaign. JMS never introduces this angle as an issue, but it could have been a political bomb that would have taken the story in a very different direction if it had been explored. At this point in the B5 saga the Anla’shok is still a Minbari military organization under the command of Delenn. It does not become an independent force until the creation of the Interstellar Alliance. Delenn had shared authority of the Rangers assigned in the B5 area with Sheridan in “The Long Twilight Struggle,” and apparently in the Shadow War Sheridan exercised co-equal authority with Delenn over all the Rangers. However, that didn’t mean that he had the legal authority to use the Minbari White Star fleet with Minbari crewmen, as well as humans, to start a war with Clark. Sheridan appropriated Minbari resources without a vote of the newly formed worker-dominated Grey Council, which probably would have turned down any such request. Sheridan also broke his promise to Londo and G’Kar that the Rangers wouldn’t become directly involved in wars. Sheridan claimed that he wanted a “clean fight,” but he clearly used a very loose definition. Moreover, without a supporting resolution from the Grey Council how does Sheridan explain to grieving Minbari families that he was justified in sending their sons and daughters to die in a civil war between humans?

QMCO5

 

[GKarsEye]

Well he didn't have a "legal" right to start a Civil War, either. He did misuse his authority, but for a greater purpose.

 

[Shaal Mayan]

Well he didn't have a "legal" right to start a Civil War, either. He did misuse his authority, but for a greater purpose.



Sheridan didn't neccarily start the civil war per se either .Clark had Santiago killed by Morden and his associates .Clark then declared martial law and bombed civilian tagets .If anyone actually started the fighting back on Earth Clark deserves the lions share of the credit himself .I think a civil war was inevitable whether Sheridan started it or not .



Sheridan also broke his promise to Londo and G’Kar that the Rangers wouldn’t become directly involved in wars.


I had forgotten about this so had to go read this at the lurkers guide.G'kar especially could have brought this issue up with Sheridan regarding his homeworld Narn .



Moreover, without a supporting resolution from the Grey Council how does Sheridan explain to grieving Minbari families that he was justified in sending their sons and daughters to die in a civil war between humans?



The only answer I can come up with is that they are rangers or religious caste members so they would have known that death would have been a possibility.In the end did Sheridan have the legal authority to use them no .Should he have had some kind of punishment or penalty yes.

 

[sleepy_shadow]

I wondered about Sheridan’s legal authority to involve the Rangers and the White Star fleet in that campaign.

Since Earth government had gone criminal... I don't think Earth citizens had *any* laws limiting which resources they could use to remove this government.

Provided the resources were obtained with regard to basic ethics (material resources not robbed, people not forced to enlist) no serious limitation could be perceived to exist.

Minbari laws... we can hardly even predict. Sure the Council could have demanded explanations from Delenn... and perhaps she did consult with them?

Perhaps they asked her: "how many Minbari crewmembers are likely to lose their lives?" Perhaps she answered: "impossible to predict, but if things go badly, multiple hundred".

Perhaps they demanded: "we require your guarantee that all are volunteers". Perhaps she assured: "I guarantee this. Everyone has chosen to join, and enjoys complete liberty of leaving anytime, except during immediate battle".

Perhaps, after hearing her... they approved?
Cannot tell.

Moreover, without a supporting resolution from the Grey Council how does Sheridan explain to grieving Minbari families that he was justified in sending their sons and daughters to die in a civil war between humans?

I can figure out something for him to have said.

-- That he is sorry for the loss.
-- That the individual who was lost enlisted with the Rangers voluntarily.
-- That he/she was aware of fighting armed and dangerous enemies.
-- That he/she had the option of leaving, but perceived the cause worth staying and fighting.
-- That countless people were very grateful to the individual, for reclaiming their freedom which was violently taken from them.

Joining the Rangers being an individual choice, decisions of Minbari government would not be terribly relevant in the matter.

Sure, Minbari government could behave in hegemonist fashion (like governments sometimes do) and pretend its people are its property... but that pretense would be hollow.

People do what people want. If someone knowingly risks their life to help another person or civilization, and this choice entails no crime... a government shouldn't have much to say.

 

[deaded]

I believe Sheridan had the moral authority to initiate a campaign to remove Clark, but recently as I watched “No Surrender, No Retreat” I wondered about Sheridan’s legal authority to involve the Rangers and the White Star fleet in that campaign.

I *TOTALLY* agree with you. However when we are talking about moral right and wrongs only history can decide. Since this is the future... ... but I'd have to say that looking 'back' Sheridan did the right thing. I myself, being a liberal, have been opposed to what the Bush administration has been doing since before the second gulf war. Is it wrong? I don't know. I think so. In my eyes it's morally wrong and it sickens me that the USA's government thinks itself the moral autority of the world (and universe probably). But are they wrong? Hmm. I don't really know. In the long run this may have been the right thing to do. It's too soon to tell. Ask me again in a hundred years. Right now I think GWB should be strung up by his testicles but in the grand scheme of things it might actually have been the right thing to to. Same with Sheridan, though I would have been on his side from the outset.

 

[KoshFan]

As to the Minbari... the newly-formed Grey Council was still finding its feet, Delenn's Entil'zha and the one who both broke and re-formed the Council, just about deified by her people before the Starfire Wheel... I rather suspect that if she asked politely, the Council at that point would give her just about anything. Also we have no real notion of the Worker Caste's agenda, do we? They followed her in "Severed Dreams;" they may well have been backing her to the hilt all the way through, and this was simply the latest step.

 

[deaded]

As to the Minbari... the newly-formed Grey Council

Newly-formed?

Wait, what did I miss??

 

[vacantlook]

Wait, what did I miss??

Delenn breaking the Grey Council in "Severed Dreams", and then rebuilding it in the fourth season after enduring the Starfire Wheel and forming it out of two religous, two warrior, and five worker caste members. This rebuilt Council is what is being referenced as the "newly-formed" Council, if I understand what was said correctly.

 

[RW7427]

I agree.

 

[Enlightened_GKar]

As for the "clean fight" issue, keep in mind the souls of Humans and Minbari are tied at the hip. I can easily argue that the soul --the greatest part of a Minbari-- is Human. We are interchangeable, and Sheridan knew that, so he used Minbari ships and people to fight like they were his soldiers, his people. This tactic works because the Minbari are his people.

 

[vacantlook]

Did Sheridan ever come to ascribe to the whole Minbari-Human soul sharing belief? He was skeptical at one point at least, but I don't remember if he ever came to truly believe it himself.

Additionally, I wonder if Delenn ever told him about the revelation she had from undergoing the Dreaming when she realized that the triluminary scanning Sinclair wasn't detecting the soul of Valen but was just detecting the DNA of the same person, and that the triluminary glowing for Delenn herself was just detecting some of Sinclair/Valen's DNA in her genetic makeup being that she was a decendent of Valen.

 

[QMCO5]

I myself, being a liberal, have been opposed to what the Bush administration has been doing since before the second gulf war. Is it wrong? I don't know. I think so. In my eyes it's morally wrong and it sickens me that the USA's government thinks itself the moral autority of the world (and universe probably). But are they wrong? Hmm. I don't really know. In the long run this may have been the right thing to do. It's too soon to tell. Ask me again in a hundred years. Right now I think GWB should be strung up by his testicles but in the grand scheme of things it might actually have been the right thing to to.

I am a career military officer and wholeheartedly support our combat operations in the Middle East. I would strongly object to anyone attempting to amputate my Commander-in-Chief, but since you seem ambivalent about it I won't frag you.

QMCO5

 

[QMCO5]

As for the "clean fight" issue, keep in mind the souls of Humans and Minbari are tied at the hip.

I certainly give you points for a creative answer!
QMCO5

 

[QMCO5]

I agree.

Thank you RW. I probably should have said "re-formed." However, it is new in that Delenn introduced a revolutionary political philosophy by giving dominance to the worker caste. Remembering Lennier's words in "Rumors, Bargains and Lies" about Delenn's world view, she could be a little naive about what power would mean to the worker caste.

QMCO5

 

[A_M_Swallow]

What ever my views on the Iraqi War, I think the occupation has been very baddy managed. I hope there will not be a repeat of these mistakes when the next country is occupied.

 

[deaded]

Wait, what did I miss??

Delenn breaking the Grey Council in "Severed Dreams", and then rebuilding it in the fourth season after enduring the Starfire Wheel and forming it out of two religous, two warrior, and five worker caste members. This rebuilt Council is what is being referenced as the "newly-formed" Council, if I understand what was said correctly.

Ok, I'll buy that.

 

[QMCO5]

What ever my views on the Iraqi War, I think the occupation has been very baddy managed. I hope there will not be a repeat of these mistakes when the next country is occupied.

I've heard a lot of rhetoric and generalizations from the opposition but no concrete specific suggestions as to what should have been done differently. The monumental task of restoring and in some cases creating infrastructure (utilities, roads, airports, public transportation, etc.) and societal systems (banking, government, education, elections, etc.) has gone remarkably well considering the daily threat from insurgents. This is far more complex than you can imagine. Our adversarial press will only report bad news from Iraq, so you can't rely on them to tell you all the truth about what's going on over there and they are certainly not going to tell you anything that will make Bush look good.

QMCO5

 

[vacantlook]

If one wants to discuss the Iraq war, there's plenty of space to do so in the News and Politics forum.

 

[sleepy_shadow]

I've heard a lot of rhetoric and generalizations from the opposition but no concrete specific suggestions as to what should have been done differently.

1) War postponed until all troops get moved in.
2) War postponed until *significantly* more allies are convinced to join.
3) Unless Saddam had voluntarily stepped down by then, war conducted -- using a force approximately 2x greater.
4) Occupation conducted with a military force about 3x bigger (bringing the density of peacekeepers per resident to levels demonstrated to work elsewhere).
5) Enough troops maintained available (and left behind to controlled territory) to stop looting and destruction of public infrastructure.
6) Organizational measures undertaken to avoid:
A) holding people without charges
B) unselective round-ups,
C) ambush-style checkpoints,
D) torture of prisoners,
E) feeding prisoners rotten food,
F) keeping them exposed to health-damaging weather
G) locating them in places where enemy fire regularly hits

I hope this explains in sufficient detail... what I found wrong in this "humanitarian intervention".

Most of above-listed things are standard problems -- to be expected when an insufficient military force (without adequate preparation or post-conflict plans)... is sent to solve a too difficult problem.

 

[deaded]

~If one wants to discuss the Iraq war, there's plenty of space to do so in the News and Politics forum.~

Tru nuf. My fault for opening the box. I was attempting to use current events to justify future events but I included too much of my own opinion. I apologize.