Its an interesting idea to debate: would Archer really turn out with that diametrically opposite viewpoint under the different circumstances of the Terran Empire. Here he is racist, xenophobic and believes that men can only become great heroes by conquering the sub-human species. He is violent, has no scruples or even a concience. In the original Timeline, he is known as the greatest explorer of the 22nd Century. He is tolerant, and a peacemaker, and we have already seen how he single-handedly creates the Federation.
But he is the same man. There could have been different environmental factors in his upbringing, different influences in his childhood, but he would still have the same parents, and he had the same shipmates, so we can assume he had the same classmates and friends and authority figures. He is not simply following orders, he seems to really believe in what he is doing.
I'm not sure about the Vulcan sub-plot. Is it logical for Vulcans to serve in the Empire at all. (I realise that Spock already did.)
It was good to see the Constitution class ship, but the change of uniforms didn't make any sense. Not after they criticised them earlier for their poor fashion. What is Phlox wearing? He looks like Kryten out of Red Dwarf.
Also, if the Empire is so racist and xenophobic, why did it not crew ships solely with humans? There were even Orion Slave Girls in the crew!!
Archer's voices are not explained. The Gorn is not really explained.
Reed acted pretty stupid and deserved to get blown up.
Not as good as part one suggested it might be,
Less and less people post here every week. Soon I'll be on my own.