Civil War, government aide tells Stark that if it wasnt for the government´s friendship, his own "accident" would´ve been the Stamford poster boy, not Speedball.
But hey, Mein kempf still sells well, and in palestine people say that Jewish concentration camps are good, so Iron Man´s methods probably does have its fans
ffs don't Godwin up the thread.
Heh, Technicality wins take much less effort. Also, dude it's a comic book. Chill the fuck out.
Yeah, it is. ;-) PS: Godwin requires either H***r or Na**m to be mentioned, thus my choice of Mein Kempf as a lesser word.
I think we can all agree that none of this crap would have ever happened if that stupid bitch Hill hadn't gotten it into her dumbass head that the way to convince Captain America a law is a good idea is to order a platoon of soldiers to fucking SHOOT at him.
If Hill hadn't been so stupidly trigger happy then Cap wouldn't have had to go into hiding, he wouldn't have even fought Iron man, they would have... you know... talked about it.
God I hate that bitch so much... she's the first one I wanted hulk to smash into paste when he got back.
I think we can all agree that none of this crap would have ever happened if that stupid bitch Hill hadn't gotten it into her dumbass head that the way to convince Captain America a law is a good idea is to order a platoon of soldiers to fucking SHOOT at him.
If Hill hadn't been so stupidly trigger happy then Cap wouldn't have had to go into hiding, he wouldn't have even fought Iron man, they would have... you know... talked about it.
God I hate that bitch so much... she's the first one I wanted hulk to smash into paste when he got back.
Yeah dude, she's totally hot. But seriously, if Fury didn't go into hiding none of this would have happened.
Malkor on
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
edited June 2007
JCM, can you stop? You're lessening my enjoyment of The Hulk, and making me hate Cho even more.
I suggest not stopping defending two mass-murderers counting billions in profits from the initiative and concentration camps, you are making me enjoy Namor and Hulk even more.
I suggest not stopping defending two mass-murderers counting billions in profits from the initiative and concentration camps, you are making me enjoy Namor and Hulk even more.
Namor is sliced awesome. Tony and Reed are complete dicks, but in this case they were correct to do what they did.
If they had sent themselves together with him, yes. I dont disagree that Hulk is dangerous, only disagree that the two who sent him are as dangerous as he is, and shouldve been exiled too.
Some more to add to Iron man´s murder-count-
Armor wars- We find out that Iron man´s armors have fallen into enemy hands for years, and Iron man has hiredd PR to hide that fact from the government, whenever theres genocide/attacks with Starktech-
In the "The Crossing", an Iron man weakened by booze easily succumbs to kang, and kills Marilla, the nanny of Crystal and Quicksilver's daughter Luna, as well as Rita DeMara, the female Yellowjacket.
His sentient armor that he kept killed hundreds
REED ad IRON MAN are as dangerous as the Hulk, and have done more damage, killed more through their actions than the Hulk ever will.
Duder just found out his tech had been stolen in the beginning. You can't cover up something you don't know.
And he blames himself for the whole thing, which is the whole point of it.
So he rampages around taking back his tech from the villains.
I have it right in front of me here.
The Lovely Bastard on
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
edited June 2007
I think the largest difference is that Hulk has absolutely no remorse or guilt, and always blames everyone else. He takes no responsibilities for his actions. A classic sociopath. Stark feels like shit all the time, and Richards usually gives himself lots of crap for screwing things up. Even during civil war they were portrayed as making hard decisions. Granted, they don't make good decisions, but honestly, who would?
I think the largest difference is that Hulk has absolutely no remorse or guilt, and always blames everyone else. He takes no responsibilities for his actions. A classic sociopath. Stark feels like shit all the time, and Richards usually gives himself lots of crap for screwing things up. Even during civil war they were portrayed as making hard decisions. Granted, they don't make good decisions, but honestly, who would?
Tony makes hard decisions?
Hell, Tony's whole deal is avoided responsibility. This is a guy who mind wiped the planet to keep his secret ID. Hell, Tony is a classic case of projection. He thinks all the other heroes are irresponsible dicks who duck avoid accountably because thats what he's all about.
Not to mention the fact that the Secret Avengers weren't even there to fight, but rather to stage a prison break and escape. If Tony had decided it wasn't worth battling them in a crowded environment and simply let them run away, nobody would have died.
Thank you, super-responsible Registration Heroes.
This is silly. They broke INTO a secure prison, with the intent to break out inmates. To say they didn't want to fight and Tony should just have let them walk away after a PRISON BREAK is just mind numbing. If you say they didn't want to fight, then the secret avengers should have all stopped and given up right there.
You know, when chasing after real criminals, the police tend not to go after them with a 'whatever the cost' mentality. That's because, y'know, the ends don't always justify the means. Also, during real prison breaks, the guards and police tend not to recruit other criminals to capture the escapees.
And that comic is stupid.
People are taking this way to seriously. Want to know why the laws in this COMIC are not exactly how ours are in the real world, and why those involved don't act how you think they would in your world? cause its a comic and they are telling a story of a hypothetical situation involving super powered beings. Sure the story mirrors certain real life events and can be tied loosely to our laws, but that only serves to ground it so that we can relate to it a bit better.
Honestly the thunderbolts idea is retarded and, in such a situation that we know how these people behave since we have been reading about these villians for years, is rather silly. But the idea is in no way original and is, like I said, simply offering an extreem overblown hypothetical story based on some of our real life events ( http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/10/01/ING42LCIGK1.DTL ). Of course the people in this comic are not acting like those in real life and we should not expect them too, get a clue.
Of course the people in this comic are not acting like those in real life and we should not expect them too, get a clue.
I've no problem with this, but if they're not acting like those in real life, why should the real life concerns of collateral damage and vigilantism come up either? The whole premise of the story is basically dragging realistic responsibilities into a fantastic situation- which can work, mind you, but you can't say that on the one hand, we'd want registration in the real world while also pointing out that this isn't the real world.
Of course the people in this comic are not acting like those in real life and we should not expect them too, get a clue.
I've no problem with this, but if they're not acting like those in real life, why should the real life concerns of collateral damage and vigilantism come up either? The whole premise of the story is basically dragging realistic responsibilities into a fantastic situation- which can work, mind you, but you can't say that on the one hand, we'd want registration in the real world while also pointing out that this isn't the real world.
I agree with that, I just mean most people bring bias of real world laws into the comic story without also considering the characters are dealing with a totally new situation. We don't know how WE would act in such a situation, so we should not complain when the characters here act opposite to our ideas.
The story wants us to consider the basics of our laws and the basic human emotions of loss and concern for the safety of others, but leave the exact details of real world law at the door so we don't get all focused on the details of a bad plot hole or something in the law.
I agree with that, I just mean most people bring bias of real world laws into the comic story without also considering the characters are dealing with a totally new situation. We don't know how WE would act in such a situation, so we should not complain when the characters here act opposite to our ideas.
The story wants us to consider the basics of our laws and the basic human emotions of loss and concern for the safety of others, but leave the exact details of real world law at the door so we don't get all focused on the details of a bad plot hole or something in the law.
It can't, though- not if it's going for the kind of serious and realistic tone that CIVIL WAR does.
It can't, though- not if it's going for the kind of serious and realistic tone that CIVIL WAR does.
This is why they should release the actual wording for the registration laws for the marvel readers who are interested in the actual by-the-law aspect of the story.
Would be a meatier, deeper read then 90% of the stuff they are releasing so far
It can't, though- not if it's going for the kind of serious and realistic tone that CIVIL WAR does.
This is why they should release the actual wording for the registration laws for the marvel readers who are interested in the actual by-the-law aspect of the story.
Would be a meatier, deeper read then 90% of the stuff they are releasing so far
$6.00 limited edition run written by Stan Lee? Legendary
edit:$6.00 was an arbitrary number, it'd probably be more.
It can't, though- not if it's going for the kind of serious and realistic tone that CIVIL WAR does.
This is why they should release the actual wording for the registration laws for the marvel readers who are interested in the actual by-the-law aspect of the story.
Would be a meatier, deeper read then 90% of the stuff they are releasing so far
$6.00 limited edition run written by Stan Lee? Legendary
edit:$6.00 was an arbitrary number, it'd probably be more.
If you've ever tried to read actual law, it wouldn't matter who wrote it, it would be incomprehensible.
It can't, though- not if it's going for the kind of serious and realistic tone that CIVIL WAR does.
This is why they should release the actual wording for the registration laws for the marvel readers who are interested in the actual by-the-law aspect of the story.
Would be a meatier, deeper read then 90% of the stuff they are releasing so far
I don't think it's necessary. We've been shown the results of the Act - the Thunderbolts, the Negative Zone prison, the draft/'depowering' of children, the imprisonment without trial, massive collateral damage caused by registered superhumans pursuing non-registrants - the exact wording is irrelevant.
That said, if it was released as a Stan Lee limited edition, I'd still buy it
I think the largest difference is that Hulk has absolutely no remorse or guilt, and always blames everyone else. He takes no responsibilities for his actions. A classic sociopath. Stark feels like shit all the time, and Richards usually gives himself lots of crap for screwing things up. Even during civil war they were portrayed as making hard decisions. Granted, they don't make good decisions, but honestly, who would?
Tony makes hard decisions?
Hell, Tony's whole deal is avoided responsibility. This is a guy who mind wiped the planet to keep his secret ID. Hell, Tony is a classic case of projection. He thinks all the other heroes are irresponsible dicks who duck avoid accountably because thats what he's all about.
Yep.
The best thing about Iron Man is that he kills because he´s drunk, mindwipes the earth, then kills/puts others in concentration camps for doing less than him.
I think the largest difference is that Hulk has absolutely no remorse or guilt, and always blames everyone else. He takes no responsibilities for his actions. A classic sociopath. Stark feels like shit all the time, and Richards usually gives himself lots of crap for screwing things up. Even during civil war they were portrayed as making hard decisions. Granted, they don't make good decisions, but honestly, who would?
Tony makes hard decisions?
Hell, Tony's whole deal is avoided responsibility. This is a guy who mind wiped the planet to keep his secret ID. Hell, Tony is a classic case of projection. He thinks all the other heroes are irresponsible dicks who duck avoid accountably because thats what he's all about.
Did you miss his speech in World War Hulk about accepting responsibility for all of his actions?
Or the fact that he publicly unmasked in front of the whole world and owned up to his mistakes.
I'm just really, really sick and tired of everyone calling Stark a fascist nazi monster when a good portion of the books being published right now fly right in the face of that.
He actually made a speech owing up? Sorry, mustve missed it over the "Im Iron Man and I do no wrong!"
*reads WWH*
Hmm, starts off good-
Im Tony Stark, Director of SHIELD
And yes, I fired the Hulk into space
So if you need soemone to balme for his actions, blame me
Now, lets see just how regretful he is?
But everything I´ve done, everything I´ll do today, everything I´ll ever do, I do to protect this world
So him killing people when drunk and having the government cover it up, mindwipe people, let his weapons/armors fall in the wrong hands time after time, the deathccount in armor wars, booze, etc, is to protect this world.
I´m not even bother going to post the whole "ive inserted the nanobots in the Hulk, its what Banner woudlve wanted" before sending missiles to kill what he thought would be puny Banner. Sorry, but that speech was useless.
His speech in Civil War? I loved how he ignored revealing his own Stamfords, instead calling Cap a terrorist. The say Iron Man says "I was wrong", I´d gladly respect him.
One of the most frustrating things in the world is when people ignore things that will contradict their argument or twist actual events to fit them.
If you are going to shit on Iron Man for making mistakes in the past, you really shouldn't be holding the Hulk up as some sort of righteous and vengeful god that will give the horrible so-called heroes their just desserts at last.
This whole thing? It's not as clear cut as you want to believe. And Amadeus Cho is a self-righteous little prick, and if his arc doesn't end with him realizing how little he actually knows about how the world works, I am going to be a little ticked off.
In case if you havent noticed, I already had said over and over that something needed to be done about the Hulk.
But you know whats funny?
They couldve asked him. Banner has time and time again exiled himself, and allowed others to imprision him, send him away etc. There was no need for sending him away by lying, right after he saved the fucking world. There was no need to put a frigging bomb, without having a device check if the planet was habited.
And i already said, Cho is a dick. But he´s a dick who realizes how ironic it is having Reed and Iron man sending Hulk away because of an incident started by SHIELD lying to hulk and the Thing picking a fight on a dare. Hercules will probably beat him up when he finds out hes being manipulated, but I will remeber him for the priceless crying look on Reed´s face as his every argument is torn down.
I dont care whether Hulk dstroys New York or no, or leaves that to Namor. I am just glad finally someone´s making Iron Man and Reed pay for the shit theyve done, and also for the sad ending to Planet Hulk, which I loved.
And the self-righteous "I am, always have been, and will always be the lone correct savior of the world!!" speech Iron Man did is no apology, but bullshit probably written by his PR people.
OK, I'm starting out that I never read the main Civil War story. I did read the spoof that was posted here shortly after the real issues though. However, if I understand everything, Wolverine started following the money trail from the explosion, killing people along the way, as did some others. They found that Nitro was drugged up to magnify his power and paid well.
This is the part I need correction on if I'm wrong, the trail leads back to Stark? If this is so, then he gave the order and laundered he money down the line through various intermediaries so it would be harder to trace back to him.
So.......he ordered the death of those kids, and that's not evil or naughty in any way? Let me clarify to the point of completely obvious. He gave the order and made the big paycheck and the drug available to make sure those kids died. Would there have been outrage at the heroes if the school was empty and the heroes stopped Nitro? No, this would be the standard where property damage means the buildings are always empty and thank god Nitro was stopped before anyone was hurt or killed (unless you're the Hulk so the writers have a gimmick to shoot him into space). If the school is empty and the heroes die in the attempt, you have the sort of stuff we see about Captain America with tributes but on a smaller scale. School gets rebuilt and they get a statue standing in front of the school with a plaque. So still no outrage.
So the only way this whole thing would work is if he sat down one day and said "I gotta get someone killed, alot of someones........kids.....a school." So using his intellect he picked someplace where it would be an "acceptable amount of casualties" to get the desired effect. I'm sure he felt terrible about it too, that the point he should have stopped, and that would have been the Iron Man we all knew and up to that point respected despite his many and storied flaws. The problem is he actually went through with it.
Now if I'm correct in all the stuff I did read and the things I heard from others to come to the conclusion, he crossed the line into supervillainy. There's a certain threshold of stuff you can forgive and he went way past that.
This is the part I need correction on if I'm wrong, the trail leads back to Stark? If this is so, then he gave the order and laundered he money down the line through various intermediaries so it would be harder to trace back to him.
No, the trail led back to some corporate cleanup crew who wanted to boost their stock price. They were punished with extreme facial stabbings by Logan.
The money trail that led back to Stark was covered in (the horrible) Frontline series. Stark invested in some stuff that went up via the happenings of Civil War because he knew how it would play out once it started (can't remember what, it may have been tech stuff, or cleanup stuff, but he hadn't been behind Nitro's explosion), then gave all the money to superhero charity because he's such a sweetheart.
At least, this is what I remember. I don't have the issues in front of me, but I'm pretty sure Logan didn't end up tracing the money/drugs back to Stark
OK, I'm starting out that I never read the main Civil War story. I did read the spoof that was posted here shortly after the real issues though. However, if I understand everything, Wolverine started following the money trail from the explosion, killing people along the way, as did some others. They found that Nitro was drugged up to magnify his power and paid well.
This is the part I need correction on if I'm wrong, the trail leads back to Stark? If this is so, then he gave the order and laundered he money down the line through various intermediaries so it would be harder to trace back to him.
It was Damage Control that was behind it - a company responsible for cleaning up the mess left behind in superhuman fights.
Edit: Beated. Tch.
natxcross on
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
edited June 2007
Holy Christ, I realize that we say Stark is evil, but he actually had somewhat understandable motivations for doing what he did. He just went about achieving what he wanted in an extremely stupid way.
Well, you know when someone named Ubergeek thinks that Tony Stark blew up a school... well, it really puts things in perspective.
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
So.......he ordered the death of those kids, and that's not evil or naughty in any way? Let me clarify to the point of completely obvious. He gave the order and made the big paycheck and the drug available to make sure those kids died. Would there have been outrage at the heroes if the school was empty and the heroes stopped Nitro? No, this would be the standard where property damage means the buildings are always empty and thank god Nitro was stopped before anyone was hurt or killed (unless you're the Hulk so the writers have a gimmick to shoot him into space). If the school is empty and the heroes die in the attempt, you have the sort of stuff we see about Captain America with tributes but on a smaller scale. School gets rebuilt and they get a statue standing in front of the school with a plaque. So still no outrage.
I think you're mistaken. From what I understand Tony had nothing to do with Stamford. What he did know was that something like Stamford was inevitably going to happen so he had a contingency plan for when it did. Part of that plan was pushing a war between the heroes, but not the explosion that killed those kids specifically.
If you've ever tried to read actual law, it wouldn't matter who wrote it, it would be incomprehensible.
I was a kid who tried to read the convoluted x-men runs in the 90's. That stuff was more cryptic and mind numbing to a kid then any lawbook could ever be, so I say bring it on.
Well, you know when someone named Ubergeek thinks that Tony Stark blew up a school... well, it really puts things in perspective.
It wasnt a school, and all we know is that Stark´s government aide told him that if it wasnt for the government, the people Tony killed in "his own Stamford" while drunk, wouldve been made public, and he´d be the posterboy of the registration. Maybe that´s why some people take it literally and think Stamford was his fault, really.
It wasnt. Now on his other incident-he had an "accident while drunk". Government covered it up. Thats all we know, so far.
And yeah, Iron Man tries to do the right thing, but he has some serious lack of self-review, and seems more eager to hide mistakes than admit them.
Hopefully Marvel can make up some "he was being blackmailed" or "it was mind-control" and somehow he´ll be good again, and i have no idea how o do that with Reed... seems after Byrne and Layton took over FF and Iron Man the characters lost a lot of their morality, down to the stuff in Civil War
I think some characters are becoming too powerful for their own good, and the situation is sort of like a mini Kingdom Come. Reed and Tony just can't relate to regular humans, and inceasingly they've shown that they can't relate to the 'regular hero on the street'. Tony created a machine that gave him more power than a human should ever had to fight a problem that he had a direct role in making. Reed can do anything presumably if he puts his mind to it, and Tony has the money, the brains, and the political clout to make pretty much anything he wants happen.
OK.... so there were 2 money trails. I was not aware of that. I only knew about the one Logan was tracing and I knew that Stark was involved with -a- money trail so I thought they were the same one. My mistake, Stark isn't as much of a douchebag as I thought, but still, he is pretty bad.
Dear Mr. Stark, please don't sue me for slander/defamation of character/etc., although you have to admit you have been a dick lately.
I've skimmed through a lot of posts, so if this has been answered please just reference the page and I'll get out of your way...
Does anybody have any quotes or links to a good argument (whether in the comics themselves or by a reader/writer) that supports the anti-registration side logically and rationally? I've been really behind on my reading, but I've noticed lots of people claiming "the pro- or anti-reg side is bad! They have no good arguments for their cause" so I've naturally assumed that the writers did a good job of making a case for both sides and the people complaining were just not paying attention or were too wrapped up in their own opinions to consider another side. However, having caught up with most of my reading, most of the pro-reg arguments put forth by Tony Stark and Reed Richards have been pretty rational (here's why registration is necessary, and even if I don't like it here's my logical reason for supporting it, etc. etc.), and when characters argue passionately against them, they seem to make baseless, even petty, attacks that don't hold up rationally - essentially, they "just don't like it, dad-gum it!" And Stark/Richards, brilliant geniuses that they are, just stand there slack-jawed at having been "served" despite the fact that even I could easily shut down their argument with a quick logic lesson (yes, I know it's just comics).
Now, I've come up with passable arguments against the registration, but most are either meta (the archetype of the superhero being outside the law, etc.) or easily outweighed by stronger pro-reg arguments or common sense ("we don't like our identities being on a list somewhere where our enemies could find them" --- well, 1) they're out there anyway, it's not like SHIELD doesn't already know who everybody is, and it's not like somebody like Doom couldn't spend five minutes and puzzle it out anyway, and that's when they're not unmasking publicly anyway, and 2) too bad! everybody in the military and police organizations are accountable - if you don't like it, don't fight crime beyond the scope of civilian aid/citizen's arrest!).
The only readers I've heard argue in favor "passionately" at my LCS have been weirdo fringe anarchists (police are evil! down with the man!) or mistaken (even heroes who aren't fighting crime are targeted by the law - that's discrimination!) or just plain bad at rational thought (pro-reg are bad because Iron Man is a jerk! Why is Iron Man a jerk? Because pro-reg are bad!!! <--- said with smug satisfaction, unaware of the sheer stupidity of such circular reasoning). I'd really like to see a writer have a GOOD, solid basis to stand on for the anti-reg group, but I don't see it. (and for the record, I know that there aren't "good" and "bad" sides here - it's pretty obvious that both sides were forced into taking actions they wouldn't have so things would go wrong (ie: attacking Cap in issue 1, forcing things to move too quickly so things like "Clor" happened), and I'm positive there's an underlying story there that they're just barely hinting at and wouldn't be surprised to find out that Cap and Iron Man have been on the "same side" all along and were just trying to play it out to uncover the conspiracy, but I digress...
You know what annoys the hell out of me? The fact that we have a still have a Civil War thread despite the fact that the last issue came out months ago, and that it has the same retarded moral debate that got the WWH thread locked.
Posts
Civil War, government aide tells Stark that if it wasnt for the government´s friendship, his own "accident" would´ve been the Stamford poster boy, not Speedball.
Yeah, it is. ;-) PS: Godwin requires either H***r or Na**m to be mentioned, thus my choice of Mein Kempf as a lesser word.
My digital art! http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=8168
My pen and paper art! http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=7462
If Hill hadn't been so stupidly trigger happy then Cap wouldn't have had to go into hiding, he wouldn't have even fought Iron man, they would have... you know... talked about it.
God I hate that bitch so much... she's the first one I wanted hulk to smash into paste when he got back.
My digital art! http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=8168
My pen and paper art! http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=7462
Yeah dude, she's totally hot. But seriously, if Fury didn't go into hiding none of this would have happened.
I suggest not stopping defending two mass-murderers counting billions in profits from the initiative and concentration camps, you are making me enjoy Namor and Hulk even more.
My digital art! http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=8168
My pen and paper art! http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=7462
Namor is sliced awesome. Tony and Reed are complete dicks, but in this case they were correct to do what they did.
Some more to add to Iron man´s murder-count-
Armor wars- We find out that Iron man´s armors have fallen into enemy hands for years, and Iron man has hiredd PR to hide that fact from the government, whenever theres genocide/attacks with Starktech-
In the "The Crossing", an Iron man weakened by booze easily succumbs to kang, and kills Marilla, the nanny of Crystal and Quicksilver's daughter Luna, as well as Rita DeMara, the female Yellowjacket.
His sentient armor that he kept killed hundreds
REED ad IRON MAN are as dangerous as the Hulk, and have done more damage, killed more through their actions than the Hulk ever will.
My digital art! http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=8168
My pen and paper art! http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=7462
Did you read Armor Wars?
Duder just found out his tech had been stolen in the beginning. You can't cover up something you don't know.
And he blames himself for the whole thing, which is the whole point of it.
So he rampages around taking back his tech from the villains.
I have it right in front of me here.
Hell, Tony's whole deal is avoided responsibility. This is a guy who mind wiped the planet to keep his secret ID. Hell, Tony is a classic case of projection. He thinks all the other heroes are irresponsible dicks who duck avoid accountably because thats what he's all about.
People are taking this way to seriously. Want to know why the laws in this COMIC are not exactly how ours are in the real world, and why those involved don't act how you think they would in your world? cause its a comic and they are telling a story of a hypothetical situation involving super powered beings. Sure the story mirrors certain real life events and can be tied loosely to our laws, but that only serves to ground it so that we can relate to it a bit better.
Honestly the thunderbolts idea is retarded and, in such a situation that we know how these people behave since we have been reading about these villians for years, is rather silly. But the idea is in no way original and is, like I said, simply offering an extreem overblown hypothetical story based on some of our real life events ( http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/10/01/ING42LCIGK1.DTL ). Of course the people in this comic are not acting like those in real life and we should not expect them too, get a clue.
also..
Stupid...LIKE A FOX!
I've no problem with this, but if they're not acting like those in real life, why should the real life concerns of collateral damage and vigilantism come up either? The whole premise of the story is basically dragging realistic responsibilities into a fantastic situation- which can work, mind you, but you can't say that on the one hand, we'd want registration in the real world while also pointing out that this isn't the real world.
I agree with that, I just mean most people bring bias of real world laws into the comic story without also considering the characters are dealing with a totally new situation. We don't know how WE would act in such a situation, so we should not complain when the characters here act opposite to our ideas.
The story wants us to consider the basics of our laws and the basic human emotions of loss and concern for the safety of others, but leave the exact details of real world law at the door so we don't get all focused on the details of a bad plot hole or something in the law.
It can't, though- not if it's going for the kind of serious and realistic tone that CIVIL WAR does.
This is why they should release the actual wording for the registration laws for the marvel readers who are interested in the actual by-the-law aspect of the story.
Would be a meatier, deeper read then 90% of the stuff they are releasing so far
$6.00 limited edition run written by Stan Lee? Legendary
edit:$6.00 was an arbitrary number, it'd probably be more.
If you've ever tried to read actual law, it wouldn't matter who wrote it, it would be incomprehensible.
I am a freaking nerd.
I don't think it's necessary. We've been shown the results of the Act - the Thunderbolts, the Negative Zone prison, the draft/'depowering' of children, the imprisonment without trial, massive collateral damage caused by registered superhumans pursuing non-registrants - the exact wording is irrelevant.
That said, if it was released as a Stan Lee limited edition, I'd still buy it
Yep.
The best thing about Iron Man is that he kills because he´s drunk, mindwipes the earth, then kills/puts others in concentration camps for doing less than him.
My digital art! http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=8168
My pen and paper art! http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=7462
Of course, you guys don't remember.
Did you miss his speech in World War Hulk about accepting responsibility for all of his actions?
Or the fact that he publicly unmasked in front of the whole world and owned up to his mistakes.
I'm just really, really sick and tired of everyone calling Stark a fascist nazi monster when a good portion of the books being published right now fly right in the face of that.
*reads WWH*
Hmm, starts off good-
Now, lets see just how regretful he is?
So him killing people when drunk and having the government cover it up, mindwipe people, let his weapons/armors fall in the wrong hands time after time, the deathccount in armor wars, booze, etc, is to protect this world.
I´m not even bother going to post the whole "ive inserted the nanobots in the Hulk, its what Banner woudlve wanted" before sending missiles to kill what he thought would be puny Banner. Sorry, but that speech was useless.
His speech in Civil War? I loved how he ignored revealing his own Stamfords, instead calling Cap a terrorist. The say Iron Man says "I was wrong", I´d gladly respect him.
My digital art! http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=8168
My pen and paper art! http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=7462
If you are going to shit on Iron Man for making mistakes in the past, you really shouldn't be holding the Hulk up as some sort of righteous and vengeful god that will give the horrible so-called heroes their just desserts at last.
This whole thing? It's not as clear cut as you want to believe. And Amadeus Cho is a self-righteous little prick, and if his arc doesn't end with him realizing how little he actually knows about how the world works, I am going to be a little ticked off.
But you know whats funny?
They couldve asked him. Banner has time and time again exiled himself, and allowed others to imprision him, send him away etc. There was no need for sending him away by lying, right after he saved the fucking world. There was no need to put a frigging bomb, without having a device check if the planet was habited.
And i already said, Cho is a dick. But he´s a dick who realizes how ironic it is having Reed and Iron man sending Hulk away because of an incident started by SHIELD lying to hulk and the Thing picking a fight on a dare. Hercules will probably beat him up when he finds out hes being manipulated, but I will remeber him for the priceless crying look on Reed´s face as his every argument is torn down.
I dont care whether Hulk dstroys New York or no, or leaves that to Namor. I am just glad finally someone´s making Iron Man and Reed pay for the shit theyve done, and also for the sad ending to Planet Hulk, which I loved.
And the self-righteous "I am, always have been, and will always be the lone correct savior of the world!!" speech Iron Man did is no apology, but bullshit probably written by his PR people.
My digital art! http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=8168
My pen and paper art! http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=7462
This is the part I need correction on if I'm wrong, the trail leads back to Stark? If this is so, then he gave the order and laundered he money down the line through various intermediaries so it would be harder to trace back to him.
So.......he ordered the death of those kids, and that's not evil or naughty in any way? Let me clarify to the point of completely obvious. He gave the order and made the big paycheck and the drug available to make sure those kids died. Would there have been outrage at the heroes if the school was empty and the heroes stopped Nitro? No, this would be the standard where property damage means the buildings are always empty and thank god Nitro was stopped before anyone was hurt or killed (unless you're the Hulk so the writers have a gimmick to shoot him into space). If the school is empty and the heroes die in the attempt, you have the sort of stuff we see about Captain America with tributes but on a smaller scale. School gets rebuilt and they get a statue standing in front of the school with a plaque. So still no outrage.
So the only way this whole thing would work is if he sat down one day and said "I gotta get someone killed, alot of someones........kids.....a school." So using his intellect he picked someplace where it would be an "acceptable amount of casualties" to get the desired effect. I'm sure he felt terrible about it too, that the point he should have stopped, and that would have been the Iron Man we all knew and up to that point respected despite his many and storied flaws. The problem is he actually went through with it.
Now if I'm correct in all the stuff I did read and the things I heard from others to come to the conclusion, he crossed the line into supervillainy. There's a certain threshold of stuff you can forgive and he went way past that.
No, the trail led back to some corporate cleanup crew who wanted to boost their stock price. They were punished with extreme facial stabbings by Logan.
The money trail that led back to Stark was covered in (the horrible) Frontline series. Stark invested in some stuff that went up via the happenings of Civil War because he knew how it would play out once it started (can't remember what, it may have been tech stuff, or cleanup stuff, but he hadn't been behind Nitro's explosion), then gave all the money to superhero charity because he's such a sweetheart.
At least, this is what I remember. I don't have the issues in front of me, but I'm pretty sure Logan didn't end up tracing the money/drugs back to Stark
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
It was Damage Control that was behind it - a company responsible for cleaning up the mess left behind in superhuman fights.
Edit: Beated. Tch.
I think you're mistaken. From what I understand Tony had nothing to do with Stamford. What he did know was that something like Stamford was inevitably going to happen so he had a contingency plan for when it did. Part of that plan was pushing a war between the heroes, but not the explosion that killed those kids specifically.
I was a kid who tried to read the convoluted x-men runs in the 90's. That stuff was more cryptic and mind numbing to a kid then any lawbook could ever be, so I say bring it on.
It wasnt a school, and all we know is that Stark´s government aide told him that if it wasnt for the government, the people Tony killed in "his own Stamford" while drunk, wouldve been made public, and he´d be the posterboy of the registration. Maybe that´s why some people take it literally and think Stamford was his fault, really.
It wasnt. Now on his other incident-he had an "accident while drunk". Government covered it up. Thats all we know, so far.
And yeah, Iron Man tries to do the right thing, but he has some serious lack of self-review, and seems more eager to hide mistakes than admit them.
Hopefully Marvel can make up some "he was being blackmailed" or "it was mind-control" and somehow he´ll be good again, and i have no idea how o do that with Reed... seems after Byrne and Layton took over FF and Iron Man the characters lost a lot of their morality, down to the stuff in Civil War
My digital art! http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=8168
My pen and paper art! http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=7462
Dear Mr. Stark, please don't sue me for slander/defamation of character/etc., although you have to admit you have been a dick lately.
Love, übergeek
Does anybody have any quotes or links to a good argument (whether in the comics themselves or by a reader/writer) that supports the anti-registration side logically and rationally? I've been really behind on my reading, but I've noticed lots of people claiming "the pro- or anti-reg side is bad! They have no good arguments for their cause" so I've naturally assumed that the writers did a good job of making a case for both sides and the people complaining were just not paying attention or were too wrapped up in their own opinions to consider another side. However, having caught up with most of my reading, most of the pro-reg arguments put forth by Tony Stark and Reed Richards have been pretty rational (here's why registration is necessary, and even if I don't like it here's my logical reason for supporting it, etc. etc.), and when characters argue passionately against them, they seem to make baseless, even petty, attacks that don't hold up rationally - essentially, they "just don't like it, dad-gum it!" And Stark/Richards, brilliant geniuses that they are, just stand there slack-jawed at having been "served" despite the fact that even I could easily shut down their argument with a quick logic lesson (yes, I know it's just comics).
Now, I've come up with passable arguments against the registration, but most are either meta (the archetype of the superhero being outside the law, etc.) or easily outweighed by stronger pro-reg arguments or common sense ("we don't like our identities being on a list somewhere where our enemies could find them" --- well, 1) they're out there anyway, it's not like SHIELD doesn't already know who everybody is, and it's not like somebody like Doom couldn't spend five minutes and puzzle it out anyway, and that's when they're not unmasking publicly anyway, and 2) too bad! everybody in the military and police organizations are accountable - if you don't like it, don't fight crime beyond the scope of civilian aid/citizen's arrest!).
The only readers I've heard argue in favor "passionately" at my LCS have been weirdo fringe anarchists (police are evil! down with the man!) or mistaken (even heroes who aren't fighting crime are targeted by the law - that's discrimination!) or just plain bad at rational thought (pro-reg are bad because Iron Man is a jerk! Why is Iron Man a jerk? Because pro-reg are bad!!! <--- said with smug satisfaction, unaware of the sheer stupidity of such circular reasoning). I'd really like to see a writer have a GOOD, solid basis to stand on for the anti-reg group, but I don't see it. (and for the record, I know that there aren't "good" and "bad" sides here - it's pretty obvious that both sides were forced into taking actions they wouldn't have so things would go wrong (ie: attacking Cap in issue 1, forcing things to move too quickly so things like "Clor" happened), and I'm positive there's an underlying story there that they're just barely hinting at and wouldn't be surprised to find out that Cap and Iron Man have been on the "same side" all along and were just trying to play it out to uncover the conspiracy, but I digress...
Anybody?:P