History Headscratchers / StargateSG1

9th Jan '16 11:15:59 AM Zero85
Is there an issue? Send a Message
Added DiffLines:
** Got a question about the good (right) senator: Im not from the states but some of the things he does seem to be a violation of separation of powers laws. The bigest would be tryng to get direct control of SGC, SGC is Executive while the senat (and senators) is Legislative and add giving orders to military personel- senators are not in the chain of command.
24th Dec '15 6:06:41 AM starman117
Is there an issue? Send a Message
Added DiffLines:
** They do learn from this, in a later episode where the gate system goes down O'Neill mentions that they tried multiple addresses in an attempt to get a lock.
20th Nov '15 9:35:54 PM Beavizz81
Is there an issue? Send a Message
Added DiffLines:
* Why didn't SGC ever use tanks or deriatives? It would make perfect sense using an IFV there.
24th Oct '15 7:55:04 AM StarSword
Is there an issue? Send a Message
Added DiffLines:
** Likely a question of resources. Earth only had a half-dozen 304s by the end of ''Universe'', not like Starfleet which has tens of thousands of ships and can afford to send a ''Nova''-class or whatever on long-term loiter, and the SGC is still engaging the Lucian Alliance among others. And their only offworld ally with the numbers necessary is the Free Jaffa Nation.
22nd Oct '15 6:56:50 PM PuritanPhysicist
Is there an issue? Send a Message
Added DiffLines:
** Which is the same problem Star Trek has: the bridge is exposed and a perfect target. Granted, that's still true of most naval ships today, but you'd think the USAF would realize the problem. * The question above about contacting the Eurondan Breeders reminded me of something that always bugged me: We know that Earth ships were sometimes used as SGC support when Stargates were out of commission ("Ethon" and "Off the Grid", for example). Why were they never used as an option to follow-up on earlier-seen planets? For example: the aforementioned Breeders had comparable technology to the Eurondans, but weren't genocidal racists; the Ancient elemental database on Littlefield's Planet (at least see if it still is in one piece after all these years); contact and support the Tollan survivors; recon hostiles like the Aschen, the Foothold aliens, or the machine race that possessed Carter; etc.
22nd Oct '15 6:48:50 PM PuritanPhysicist
Is there an issue? Send a Message
Added DiffLines:
** We know how the Replicators originated, thanks to Atlantis: the android version were the originals and meant to fight the Wraith, but were PutOnABus by the Lantean Ancients. At least one was created in the Milky Way (Reese) after the Lanteans returned to the Milky Way, and similarly abandoned. We also know that the Ancients and Asgard were allies. Thus, an Ancient for one reason or another conducted Replicator experiments in the Ida Galaxy, but it was abandoned. Eventually, it created the Replicator "bugs" like Reese, which were found by the Asgard.
10th Oct '15 5:10:37 AM charm
Is there an issue? Send a Message
***** Just to clarify, Canada has not been UNDER Great Britain, in regards to its relations with other countries, since 1931. For constitutional matters, we got control in 1982. The previous poster is correct in stating there is a bond between Canada and Britain: military personnel and (I think) Members of Parliament) swear an oath to the Monarch & its heirs. That connection wouldn't be a reason for Canada to be informed just cos Great Britain was. Canada's bond to Great Britain is similar to that of most of the Commonwealth nations. As for possible In Universe reasons why Canada gets informed of the attack but wasn't at the meeting:
to:
***** Just to clarify, Canada has not been UNDER Great Britain, in regards to its relations with other countries, since 1931. For constitutional matters, we got control in 1982. The previous poster is correct in stating there is a bond between Canada and Britain: military personnel and (I think) Members of Parliament) swear an oath to the Monarch & its heirs. That connection wouldn't be a reason for Canada (or any Commonwealth nation) to be informed just cos Great Britain was. Canada's bond to Great Britain is similar to that of most of the Commonwealth nations. was. As for possible In Universe reasons why Canada gets informed of the attack but wasn't at the meeting:

d) Canada was not informed until Annubis was flying overhead. Certainly not officially. The four countries that were invited to the meeting are, along with the US, the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council; so, it could be reasonable for the US to inform those 4 and not include its NORAD buddy.
to:
d) Canada was not informed until Annubis was flying overhead. Certainly not officially. The four countries that were invited to the meeting are, along with the US, the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council; so, it could be reasonable for the US to inform those 4 and not include its NORAD buddy. \n\n\n Therefore, Canada was not at the meeting. Faced with imminent attack, the President wanted our firepower -- forget Ghostbusters "Who're you gonna call? --- Vimy Takers!"
10th Oct '15 4:56:10 AM charm
Is there an issue? Send a Message
***** Just to clarify, Canada has not been UNDER Great Britain, in regards to its relations with other countries, since 1931. For constitutional matters, we got control in 1982. The previous poster is correct in stating there is a bound between Canada and Britain: military personnel and (I think) Members of Parliament) swear an oath to the Monarch & its heirs. That connection wouldn't be a reason for Canada to be informed just cos Great Britain was. Canada's bond to Great Britain is similar to that of most of the Commonwealth nations. As for possible In Universe reasons why Canada gets informed of the attack but wasn't at the meeting:
to:
***** Just to clarify, Canada has not been UNDER Great Britain, in regards to its relations with other countries, since 1931. For constitutional matters, we got control in 1982. The previous poster is correct in stating there is a bound bond between Canada and Britain: military personnel and (I think) Members of Parliament) swear an oath to the Monarch & its heirs. That connection wouldn't be a reason for Canada to be informed just cos Great Britain was. Canada's bond to Great Britain is similar to that of most of the Commonwealth nations. As for possible In Universe reasons why Canada gets informed of the attack but wasn't at the meeting: meeting:

***** Just to clarify, Canada has not been UNDER Great Britain, in regards to its relations with other countries, since 1931. For constitutional matters, we got control in 1982. The previous poster is correct in stating there is a bound between Canada and Britain: military personnel and (I think) Members of Parliament) swear an oath to the Monarch & its heirs. That connection wouldn't be a reason for Canada to be informed just cos Great Britain was. Canada's bond to Great Britain is similar to that of most of the Commonwealth nations. As for possible In Universe reasons why Canada gets informed of the attack but wasn't at the meeting:

c) Note, the four countries that were invited to the meeting are, along with the US, members of the Security Council (the constant 5) so it could be reasonable for the US to inform those 4 and not include its NORAD buddy. d) If Canada already knew --- Just as China may have been pissed if they discovered that the US and Canada were keeping a huge strategic advantage from them, I don't know what view would be taken if Canadian military personnel had huge, world-changing information and had actively kept it from the Crown. If there is some sort of reporting set up from the military to the Governor General, omission could be construed as a breaching the oath. Canada's presence at the Disclosure meeting could be awkward --- If such a thing occurred IRL (and made it into the public record), the "Colorado Summit" would be one more event/date, along with the 1931 Statute of Westminster and 1982 Constitution, that future high school students would have to recount as yet another step in Canada's long trek to independence.
to:
c) Note, the four countries that were invited to the meeting are, along with the US, members of the Security Council (the constant 5) so it could be reasonable for the US to inform those 4 and not include its NORAD buddy. d) If Canada already knew --- Just as China may have been pissed if they discovered that the US and Canada were keeping a huge strategic advantage from them, I don't know what view would be taken if Canadian military personnel had huge, world-changing information and had actively kept it from the Crown. If there is some sort of reporting set up from the military to the Governor General, omission could be construed as a breaching the oath. Canada's presence at the Disclosure meeting could be awkward --- If such a thing occurred IRL (and made it into the public record), the "Colorado Summit" would be one more event/date, along with the 1931 Statute of Westminster and 1982 Constitution, that future high school students would have to recount as yet another step in Canada's long trek to independence. d) Canada was not informed until Annubis was flying overhead. Certainly not officially. The four countries that were invited to the meeting are, along with the US, the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council; so, it could be reasonable for the US to inform those 4 and not include its NORAD buddy.
10th Oct '15 4:46:10 AM charm
Is there an issue? Send a Message
***** Just to clarify, Canada has not been UNDER Great Britain, in regards to its relations with other countries, since 1931. For constitutional matters, we got control in 1982. The previous poster is correct in stating there is a bound between Canada and Britain: military personnel and (I think) Members of Parliament) swear an oath to the Monarch & its heirs. That connection wouldn't be a reason for Canada to be informed just cos Great Britain was. --- even if it were unique in its connection to Great Britain. . As for possible IU reasons why Canada gets informed of the attack but wasn't at the meeting: a) proximity to Cheyenne Mountain and NORAD connection -- applies whether Canada knew about the stargate (either officially or unofficially) or not.
to:
***** Just to clarify, Canada has not been UNDER Great Britain, in regards to its relations with other countries, since 1931. For constitutional matters, we got control in 1982. The previous poster is correct in stating there is a bound between Canada and Britain: military personnel and (I think) Members of Parliament) swear an oath to the Monarch & its heirs. That connection wouldn't be a reason for Canada to be informed just cos Great Britain was. \n\n --- even if it were unique in its connection Canada's bond to Great Britain. . Britain is similar to that of most of the Commonwealth nations. As for possible IU In Universe reasons why Canada gets informed of the attack but wasn't at the meeting: a) proximity to Cheyenne Mountain and NORAD connection -- applies whether regardless of Canada knew knowing about the stargate (either officially either officially, unofficially, or unofficially) or not. not at all;

d) I'm not sure of my military knowledge but I think Canadian Forces personnel swear an oath to the Queen. Just as China may have been pissed if they discovered that the US and Canada were keeping a huge strategic advantage from them, I don't know what view would be taken if Canadian military personnel had huge, world-changing information and had actively kept it from the crown. If there is some sort of reporting set up from the military to the Lieutenant Governor, omission could be construed as a breaching the oath. Canada's presence at the Disclosure meeting could be awkward --- If such a thing occurred IRL, the "Colorado Summit" would be one more event/date, along with the 1931 Statute of Westminster and 1982 Constitution, that future high school students would have to recount as yet another step in Canada's long trek to independence.
to:
d) I'm not sure of my military knowledge but I think Canadian Forces personnel swear an oath to the Queen. If Canada already knew --- Just as China may have been pissed if they discovered that the US and Canada were keeping a huge strategic advantage from them, I don't know what view would be taken if Canadian military personnel had huge, world-changing information and had actively kept it from the crown. Crown. If there is some sort of reporting set up from the military to the Lieutenant Governor, Governor General, omission could be construed as a breaching the oath. Canada's presence at the Disclosure meeting could be awkward --- If such a thing occurred IRL, IRL (and made it into the public record), the "Colorado Summit" would be one more event/date, along with the 1931 Statute of Westminster and 1982 Constitution, that future high school students would have to recount as yet another step in Canada's long trek to independence.
10th Oct '15 4:34:09 AM charm
Is there an issue? Send a Message
***** Just to clarify, Canada has not been UNDER Great Britain, in regards to its relations with other countries, since 1931. For constitutional matters, we got control in 1982. We are still a monarchy, connected to UK but so are most of the Commonwealth countries. Great Britain being aware wouldn't have been any kind of reason to inform Canada. As for possible IU reasons why Canada gets informed of the attack but wasn't at the meeting:
to:
***** Just to clarify, Canada has not been UNDER Great Britain, in regards to its relations with other countries, since 1931. For constitutional matters, we got control in 1982. We are still The previous poster is correct in stating there is a monarchy, connected bound between Canada and Britain: military personnel and (I think) Members of Parliament) swear an oath to UK but so are most of the Commonwealth countries. Monarch & its heirs. That connection wouldn't be a reason for Canada to be informed just cos Great Britain being aware wouldn't have been any kind of reason was. --- even if it were unique in its connection to inform Canada.Great Britain. . As for possible IU reasons why Canada gets informed of the attack but wasn't at the meeting:
This list shows the last 10 events of 206. Show all.