Topic: Napolean CV?

[WhiteKnight]

Does anyone know where I might find this ship?or baring that anyone have it like to share?Thanks.  

[DonKarnage]

if your looking for the tos model i have it, if not i don't know it

[WhiteKnight]

yes thats the one. Do you have a link or can you email it to me? my email is ABTF69 at Yahoo dot com.Thank you.

[DonKarnage]

the model is send, enjoy it  

[Anthony_Scott]

Quote:
if your looking for the tos model i have it, if not i don't know it  

Send it to me too please.. anthonyscott_4@lycos.com

Thanks!

Semper Fi, Carry On

[Rat_Boy]

Am I the only one who thinks that the Napolean-class isn't a very Star Trekish sounding name?

[Kaenyne]

Nope. But a model's name is chosen under the discretion of its creator.

[Rat_Boy]

Quote:
Nope. But a model's name is chosen under the discretion of its creator.  

Yeah, but the Napolean's name comes from SFB.  I've always wondered why they named a ship after a military dictator.

[Kaenyne]

Good question, as Starfleet ships, when naming vessels, have chosen names of places, or names of today's vessels. In cases where they name ships after historical figures, they are "good guys" for lack of a better term. Founding fathers,  "heroic" military figures, explorers, scientists, etc.

[Rat_Boy]

In my fic, including the story available through the link in my sig, I arbitrarily renamed it the Nimitz to fix that.

[DonKarnage]

well since its a carrier ya could call it enterprise but that name is already use for the heavy cruiser

[Anthony_Scott]

Here is my own list of names that I am going to use for my class names:

John F. Kennedy
Martin Luther
Martin Luther King
Erwin Rommel
Vespanius
Pharsalus
Verdun
Somme
Marne
Villers Bocage

Well, that is just a partial ist....but you guys get the general idea.

Semper Fi, Carry On

[E_Look]

I forget where I got it from now, but the shiplist for Starfleet NCAs in my TOS mod of SFC1 has EVERY 20th century dictator... and a maybe an American President (Nixon).  Again, I forget which wiseguy programmed those names...

[WhiteKnight]

Got it thanks.It's not the one I was thinking of but this one is cool too.I think the one I was thinking was made by Atra a long time ago and was a "low" looking ship with the nacelles one the sides and a low flatish hull that was atached directly to the saucer.oh well this is coo too thanks again.

[InragedSith]

Quote:

Quote:
Nope. But a model's name is chosen under the discretion of its creator.  

Yeah, but the Napolean's name comes from SFB.  I've always wondered why they named a ship after a military dictator.  

Maybe the Feds named the ship after the dessert

[WhiteKnight]

maybe the name was just cool?And as far as dictators go napolean isn't really the same as say  NCC 666 USS Hitler.

[ModelsPlease]

Quote:
Got it thanks.It's not the one I was thinking of but this one is cool too.I think the one I was thinking was made by Atra a long time ago and was a "low" looking ship with the nacelles one the sides and a low flatish hull that was atached directly to the saucer.oh well this is coo too thanks again.  

I have several  Tos Carriers if you like,I'll find them after work and see if I have the oone you want sir.
-MP  

[WhiteKnight]

Thanks MP but I found it .It was at Fleetdock 13.Thank you anyway.

[DonKarnage]

Quote:

Quote:
Got it thanks.It's not the one I was thinking of but this one is cool too.I think the one I was thinking was made by Atra a long time ago and was a "low" looking ship with the nacelles one the sides and a low flatish hull that was atached directly to the saucer.oh well this is coo too thanks again.  

I have several  Tos Carriers if you like,I'll find them after work and see if I have the oone you want sir.
-MP  

can you send me pics of these tos carrier, i might not have one of them.

[J. Carney]

Quote:
Good question, as Starfleet ships, when naming vessels, have chosen names of places, or names of today's vessels. In cases where they name ships after historical figures, they are "good guys" for lack of a better term. Founding fathers,  "heroic" military figures, explorers, scientists, etc.  

Napolean was hardly a 'bad guy' as far as history as a whole is concerned. Look at Robspiere and compare the two; you'll see what I'm driving at. Napolean didn't really mistreat the populace (that I've been able to find)- all he did was try to unite the European contenent under his rule.

As far as how he was treated by the people- his soldiers (those who would have known him best, as he spent all but about 25 years of his life on campaign) loved him and were feircely loyal. When he invaded after his first exile they were sent to kill him; they instead- as a body- mutanied and joined him. He couldn't have been all that callous and evil a man for his men to love him to the point of risking their lives to serve him.

All this politically correct "good guy-bad guy" crap is determined by the guys who write the school books. I hate that even Star Trek subscribes to it.

P.S.- if you want to see how nice a guy Nimitz was look at how he emulated Hitler when it came to the order to abandon survivors of merchant ships to the mercy of the sea. Karl Donetz, Hitler's Admiral of sub ops, opposed the order and prior to it made his men aid sailors stranded in the water. After the  Laconia  (sp?) incident Hitler issued an order to leave survivors to drown (lost 2 U-boats aiding in the rescue of Italian POWS after liner sinking). Donetz protested, Hitler threatened, Dontez backed down.

Nimitz ordered this from the start. He actively promoted the tactic of surfacing and machine-gunning Japaneese merchant sailors- and continued to do so till the end of the war.

How's that for a 'good guy?'

[The_Infiltrator]

Quote:


Nimitz ordered this from the start. He actively promoted the tactic of surfacing and machine-gunning Japaneese merchant sailors- and continued to do so till the end of the war.

How's that for a 'good guy?'  

I don't know where you're getting this. The order was simply to execute unrestricted submarine warfare against the Japanese at the start of the second world war. Nimitz wasn't even directly in command of submarines in the pacific - that would (for most of the war) be Admiral Charles Lockwood (which is why the BOQ on subbase Hawaii is callled Lockwood Hall).  

[Anthony_Scott]

Quote:

Quote:
Good question, as Starfleet ships, when naming vessels, have chosen names of places, or names of today's vessels. In cases where they name ships after historical figures, they are "good guys" for lack of a better term. Founding fathers,  "heroic" military figures, explorers, scientists, etc.  

Napolean was hardly a 'bad guy' as far as history as a whole is concerned. Look at Robspiere and compare the two; you'll see what I'm driving at. Napolean didn't really mistreat the populace (that I've been able to find)- all he did was try to unite the European contenent under his rule.

As far as how he was treated by the people- his soldiers (those who would have known him best, as he spent all but about 25 years of his life on campaign) loved him and were feircely loyal. When he invaded after his first exile they were sent to kill him; they instead- as a body- mutanied and joined him. He couldn't have been all that callous and evil a man for his men to love him to the point of risking their lives to serve him.

All this politically correct "good guy-bad guy" crap is determined by the guys who write the school books. I hate that even Star Trek subscribes to it.

P.S.- if you want to see how nice a guy Nimitz was look at how he emulated Hitler when it came to the order to abandon survivors of merchant ships to the mercy of the sea. Karl Donetz, Hitler's Admiral of sub ops, opposed the order and prior to it made his men aid sailors stranded in the water. After the  Laconia  (sp?) incident Hitler issued an order to leave survivors to drown (lost 2 U-boats aiding in the rescue of Italian POWS after liner sinking). Donetz protested, Hitler threatened, Dontez backed down.

Nimitz ordered this from the start. He actively promoted the tactic of surfacing and machine-gunning Japaneese merchant sailors- and continued to do so till the end of the war.

How's that for a 'good guy?'  

~sniff sniff~ Oh my, do i read some revisionist history at work here? The US Sub Fleet Commander in the second war actually issued orders for unrestricted antishipping warfare. And Japanese servicemembers had a habit of refusing the offer of a rescue, some going as far as swimming away from US Navy surface and subsurface vessels during the war.

Any discussion of the Japanese and US Navies activities during what was a brutal conflict need to be discussed within the context of that time and that war.

As far as the Nazi Uboat fleet in the second war, all commanders would take survivors aboard when it was safe
  and   practicable to do so, a point brilliantly dramatized in Das Boot when they had torpedoed a British tanker and discovered that she was still afloat. Although the crewmen begain swimming towards the uboot, the captain was forced to abandon them men because he had not the space to accomodate them. Again, there is a differance between a tactical decision and a deliberate war crime. We are hardly in a position to "monday morning quarterback" such things. There were incidences of outright crimes against helpless survivors on both sides.

Whew..sorry but history was my major in college and I just cannot sit idly by while some things in history are so blatantly misunderstood or misrepresented.

Semper Fi, Carry On  

[J. Carney]

A. Scott

Not a history major here- it's my MINOR. Still, I guess that I see the situation a little differently- not too differently, just from off to the side a little, I guess.

The fact remain that the U.S. used Donetz's tactics  agianst him at Nuermburg and got him 15 years for use of 'Unrestricted Submarine Warfare.' We also gave Nimitz something that no man really wanted for using unrestricted submaring warfare- a fifth star (or, to be correct, for ordering Lockwood to use it).

I just want people to remember that ALL history is revisionist; only the victor writes the history books. The line between good and bad is not as black and white as Western Civ I & II make it.

And this is the same war- it was just as brutal exerywhere as it was in the Pacific. Russian pilots used kamikazi attacks on the Germans- trying to chew up the tail off their opponent's plane with their own prop. The United States firebombed Dersdin's non-military areas and called it a 'tactic'; Germany used ballistic missiles agianst Britan and we call it a war crime(indsicriminate killling of civilians). On all sides men dided in horrible ways for a lot of reasons, good and bad.

The difference in a criminal and a hero is often the stroke of a pen.


 

[The_Infiltrator]

Quote:



~sniff sniff~ Oh my, do i read some revisionist history at work here? The US Sub Fleet Commander in the second war actually issued orders for unrestricted antishipping warfare. And Japanese servicemembers had a habit of refusing the offer of a rescue, some going as far as swimming away from US Navy surface and subsurface vessels during the war.

Actually, it wasn't unheard of if the Japanese were still armed with small arms in their lifeboats that they would open fire on the boat. At the start of the war it was common to attempt to pick up prisoners after a sinking for intelligence purposes. Few of these attempts were successful.

 

[WhiteKnight]

Hmmm not locked yet looks like everyone is still discussing this like adults.In war in general there is winners and losers and right and wrong is decided afterwards.I think thats how it should be win and you get to write the history.It's sad but when it comes to national survival the "moral high ground" somtimes needs(rightly so) to take a back seat to winning.I feel being right is a perk that the US has had most of the time but as with any country we have our share of "darker" moments.My 2 cents.

[ModelsPlease]

Cool discussion on war,but back to the CVS anyone wanna try and tackle a TNG version ?