Fair and Balanced

[overcomebyfumes]

I know it's been said in interviews that no side is "right" or "wrong" and that both sides would have pros and cons, but isn't it seeming like Marvel is skewing things to make the anti-registration side more heroic?

I know American popular culture has had a thing for rebels since the Revolution (imagine re-staging the Star Wars saga with the Empire as the heroes and the Rebel Alliance as villianous anarchists, a view many citizens in the Empire surely held) - but surely Marvel can do more to make the Pro-Registration look like they're fighting for what they believe is right.

Mainly, I have an issue with three plot points so far:

Tony's duplicity in hiring the Titanium Man to fight Spidy makes him look like a supreme bastard, regardless of what his motivations are. He's got noble ideals with what he wants to accomplish with registration, but he's stooping to "evil" means to do it. Many, myself included, see this act as being out-of-character for Tony Stark.

Tony requesting that the Thunderbolts recruit villians to the pro-registration cause is a complete and utter disaster waiting to happen, and I'm really surprised that someone as smart as Tony can't see this. Can anyone else see this backfiring BIG TIME???

Secret prisons are being planned. While this may be a natural outgrowth of registration - what do you do with heroes that refuse to register? - and even though it does reflect what's going on in the news around us today, the existence of secret prisons will strike many as sinister and fascist. Do they really need to be going here? Do we need to see "photos" of heroes being tortured? Is that where they are going with this? If it is, even this one thing could turn the average reader totally against the pro-registration side. There would need to be an unbelievable atrocity on the rebel side to even begin to balance this out. Even worse then the schoolyard fiasco.

There's the retort "Well, we see Cap breaking the law", but when Cap breaks the law, it's heroic! and he's standing up for what he believes in. Tony trying to enforce the law is not being portrayed in the same light. Look at the sequence in #2 where Patriot and the Young Avengers are arrested. Who are the heroes there? Who are the villians?

Maybe it's the natural American tendency to identify with the rebels, but it didn't look balanced to me.

What if? - What if, instead of faceless SHIELD mooks, Tony HIMSELF was involved, and had handled the situation? What if he had talked the Young Avengers down, and pursuaded them to give themselves up? Can you see how this would have changed how we would see Cap's rescue, and how it would make the situation more balanced?

Maybe this is premature, and shortly we'll see the dark side of the anti-registration Rebel Alliance. I'd like to see things made a little more even, cause right now, they ain't. Despite what they've been telling us.

Pax.

[agrich]

I don't know...I think if Marvel were going out of their way to make things seem fair and balanced, it would read pretty fake and forced. In Civil War we have seen a scene or two with Stark conflicted over his actions, as well as Reed Richards pointing out the results of superheroes continuing to proliferate unchecked. I personally am anti-registration, but the fact that there are plenty of people here who ARE on the pro-registration side indicates that Marvel has done enough to make some people feel the pros are right. If Marvel had a scene of Stark being conflicted after every controversial decision, after a while it would seem pretty heavy-handed.

And with that said, Marvel's job is only to tell a good story, not necessarily a fair and balanced one.

[Drakenred]

And with that said, Marvel's job is only to tell a good story, not necessarily a fair and balanced one.


After all we can leave the Fair and Ballanced Storys to Fox News.

[Alan2099]

This really isn't an idea that can be shown to be "fair and balanced." Maybe it could have been when it first started, but to make the idea work, you've got to ignore almost the run of Marvel Comics or except that teh whole time they were doing things wrong.

[Drakenred]

This really isn't an idea that can be shown to be "fair and balanced." Maybe it could have been when it first started, but to make the idea work, you've got to ignore almost the run of Marvel Comics or except that teh whole time they were doing things wrong.

Which considering that most of marvels titals have been cancled. . . . . ;)

[The Shadow]

but isn't it seeming like Marvel is skewing things to make the anti-registration side more heroic?
By having Cap and the others acting openly as lawbreakers? Or Cap pushing a SHIELD agent (one he may have worked with in the past!) out of a moving vehicle into oncoming traffic?

Tony's duplicity in hiring the Titanium Man to fight Spidy makes him look like a supreme bastard, regardless of what his motivations are. He's got noble ideals with what he wants to accomplish with registration, but he's stooping to "evil" means to do it. Many, myself included, see this act as being out-of-character for Tony Stark.
Well, you mentioned the Revolutionary War earlier... and George Washington along with all the signers of the declaration of Independence were traitors. Their intentions were still noble but they went far outside the proper channels to get the job done.

Also, you say it would be out of character for Tony... but I disagree. Tony is the owner/CEO of a huge multinational corporation. he doesn't maintain his business and standing by being Mr. Nice Guy. I'm sure he's got a ruthless side and probably believes (like many successful business men and women) that the ends justify the means. If Tony were a charitable guy who ran a soup kitchen then it might be out of character... but keep in mind his occupation and what he has to do to ensure he stays on top.

Tony requesting that the Thunderbolts recruit villians to the pro-registration cause is a complete and utter disaster waiting to happen, and I'm really surprised that someone as smart as Tony can't see this. Can anyone else see this backfiring BIG TIME???
Why is it a disaster in the making? If it works there is another new registration... if it doesn't the T-Bolts are already there to apprehend! Seems like a smart move to me.

the existence of secret prisons will strike many as sinister and fascist.
Or the flip side is one of a government that is willing to do something unpopular for the greater good of the country and the people.

Do they really need to be going here? Do we need to see "photos" of heroes being tortured? Is that where they are going with this?
Jumping the gun here.

If it is, even this one thing could turn the average reader totally against the pro-registration side.
Unless that person is an ultra-conservative.

There's the retort "Well, we see Cap breaking the law", but when Cap breaks the law, it's heroic! and he's standing up for what he believes in. Tony trying to enforce the law is not being portrayed in the same light.
Well, to be fair Cap IS breaking the law.

And Tony is standing up for what he believes in too. He's almost sick about it as seen in Civil War #2 as the clock struck midnight. It's not a decision that has come easy to him. He seems quite conflicted.

Look at the sequence in #2 where Patriot and the Young Avengers are arrested. Who are the heroes there? Who are the villians?
That's perspective. To someone in Iraq a suicide bomber isn't a bad guy... but to us he is.

The FACT is the Young Avengers are outlaws (not villains!) and SHIELD is apprehending lawbreakers. End of story.

What if? - What if, instead of faceless SHIELD mooks, Tony HIMSELF was involved, and had handled the situation? What if he had talked the Young Avengers down, and pursuaded them to give themselves up? Can you see how this would have changed how we would see Cap's rescue, and how it would make the situation more balanced?
Tony can't be everywhere at once. If there were 10 raids that night how can he be everywhere? (And don't say Wolverine would be! LOL :p )

[Bobster777]

I think no matter what, Cap's side will automatically be more endearing to most fans. He's sticking up for the rights of people who have risked their lives for the world countless times. He's just doing what is natural to him. Still, it doesn't make him right, it just makes it consistent with who he is.

[Micro]

I would have to agree after reading Civil war 1 and 2, that it is written clearly in favor of the anti-reg group. The reasons the Pro side seems wrong is because no one is really on the Pro side(except shield who have been shown to be bad guys since Nick Fury left, they are constantly described as corrupt) Iron man isn't shown infavor of the act, he just goes along with it because he feels he can't stop it. I think Civil War would seem more fair, if the storyline itself would have built up more in the other books. They should have had the registration optional at first. People such as Captain America could sign up, and get paid to fight crime, and it could be seen as a positive thing among the other heros. Then in Civil War they could focus on the public not trusting non registered Heros(because of the new warrors). This would be much more believable to me. It would have been interesting to see Spiderman struggle to decide if he should join all the other heros so he could be paid(while being spiderman) to help support his family. I think this version would leave the readers asking "why not register?" rather than "I wouldn't want to register, Captian Ameria and all the best heros are agianst it, im with them" To me that would have been more compelling.

[The Shadow]

Iron man isn't shown infavor of the act, he just goes along with it because he feels he can't stop it.
No, he does agree with it... that's why he has Titanium Man fight him... to prove his point.

I think Civil War would seem more fair, if the storyline itself would have built up more in the other books. They should have had the registration optional at first.
It was optional. Then at midnight in Civil War #2 it became law.

It would have been interesting to see Spiderman struggle to decide if he should join all the other heros so he could be paid(while being spiderman) to help support his family.
Read the "Road to Civil War" in Amazing Spider-Man... exactly what you want to see actually happened.

Along with Tony's struggles and decision to go with it.

[Bobster777]

Also, during Illuminati, Iron Man was the one who got everyone on board with the act, being that he is a futurist and all. Remember, he's a futurist.

[Alan2099]

Yes, but didn't he say he didn't like it but knew it was bound to happen anyway?

[Serik]

I don't see this as good vs. evil, but pragmatism (Tony) vs. idealism (Cap).

[StoneGold]

I don't see this as good vs. evil, but pragmatism (Tony) vs. idealism (Cap).
Basically. But superhero stories tend to deal in absolutes, and pragmatism vs. idealism isn't really an absolute. So the reader fills in the blanks.

[Bobster777]

Yes, but didn't he say he didn't like it but knew it was bound to happen anyway?

yeah true. I mean, for sure, if he could have it status quo, I don't think he would change anything. However, considering what happened at Stamford, I think that changed his stance from hesitant to willing leader of pro-registration.

[overcomebyfumes]

Just a couple of quick thoughts before I'm out the door:



Why is it a disaster in the making? If it works there is another new registration... if it doesn't the T-Bolts are already there to apprehend! Seems like a smart move to me.


Let's say some mooks like the Wrecking Crew register. Now you've got a set up for super-powered police brutality. Ugh.


Well, to be fair Cap IS breaking the law.

And Tony is standing up for what he believes in too. He's almost sick about it as seen in Civil War #2 as the clock struck midnight. It's not a decision that has come easy to him. He seems quite conflicted.


That's it exactly. We see Tony's conflicted (in a fantastic scene btw) - we don't see the same with Cap. We're not sure if Tony's doing the right thing, but we're sure as hell that Cap is.

...and since when has strictly obeying the law been protrayed in our media as being heroic? Even the president is trying to get away with breaking the law by saying it's the patriotic thing to do. (Voice-over) "He's a tormented cop willing to take the law into his own hands ... He's a homicide detective who breaks all the rules... ect ect"

Pax.

[Miss Kitty Fantastico]

Stamford is a big factor that - for all that it's pretty in-your-face in Civil War - seems to be being ignored a fair bit in terms of the pros and cons of pro- and anti-reg. Basically:

Fact: America (by extension the world, but let's face it, it's the US nine times out of ten) needs superheroes who can operate openly and with the approval of both the population and the government. Sure there's off-the-record superheroes like Punisher and (until just now) Spider-Man, but I think it's pretty plain that both groups and individuals of 'legit' superheroes are necessary for the political and social stability of the nation. Reason being, there's guys with superpowers around, one way or the other - if they're all, in fact or perception, operating without the consent of the state, that's going to create a climate of anxiety in DC, which'll lead to some idiot signing a mutual defense pact with Doctor Doom. I'm not kidding - the government must have some superheroes that it feels, all things being equal, it can trust. Because they'll not rest unless they have someone capable of operating for them in the superpowers theatre of conflict, and if it's not heroes, it'll have to be whoever they can get. Hence, to pick an example, the Avengers are not just heroes, they're a defence mechanism against villains getting into bed with the government.

Problem: the people and government feel unsafe with the way superheroes are currently operating. Rightly or wrongly (and 600 dead isn't easy to write off as a clerical error) the perception now is that superheroes, as they operate at present, are potentially dangerous threats to public safety. There's good reasons for this (obviously you can't just assume everything's rosy about the general superhero M.O. after Stamford), and less good reasons (the media's blaming heroes for Stamford, leading to a significant slice of the population railing against anyone in spandex tights; the perception thanks to the comments about ratings than the New Warriors were thoroughly irresponsible, as well as unlucky). Good or bad, it's a fact. If the government doesn't do something, they'll be defeated at the next election by the opposition, because they damn well will promise to do something. Therefore, some form of regulation is inevitable.

Pro-reg solution: accept registration, and work with it to (hopefully) make it work as best it can. Benefit: superheroes are, by and large, going to be trusted again, leading to a resumption of the original status quo with superheroes fulfilling their necessary defensive and deterrent role for the US. Drawback: introducing bureaucracy into anything provides the opportunity for corruption to rear its ugly head.

Anti-reg solution: refuse registration. Benefit: insofar as they're able to operate without being arrested by SHIELD, superheroes can keep on truckin' just as before. Drawback: public and government distrust of superheroes is intensified, making it even more likely they'll take extreme measures to protect their interests (i.e. hiring supervillains just so they can have someone with a power nominally on their side).

That's pretty much the situation as I see it. Both sides are sticking to their guns in order to achieve the benefit side of their equation. However in doing so, they're creating the opportunity for both sets of drawbacks to come into play - the potential for corruption in super-regulation is made inevitable by the political pressure to quickly and cleanly wrap up the anti-reg side, leading to SHIELD going on the warpath and Iron Man hiring the Thunderbolts.

Is either side more blameless than the other? It's easy to side with the anti-reg side, because they're rebels, because they're idealists, because we don't trust governments or big business (i.e. those with a vested interest in political stability and the means to effect it) - and (I believe) above all because these are comic books, and it's not our family and neighbours and friends who are at risk from being vaporised next time some hotheaded yahoo decides to bushwhack a walking nuclear weapon in an urban area. It's easy to be idealistic when you've got nothing to lose, and the worst that can happen to us as readers is that we see some art of imaginary people being blown up - that doesn't count against out deep-seated desire to believe in ideals and heroism, in a medium that's catered to that desire for decades.

But look at the other side - are the pro-reg people (the 'heroes', not Baron Zemo et al) less committed to a positive outcome? Are they more callous with regard to the negative consequences of what they're doing? "Please let us be doing the right thing here." "We were trying to save lives." The anti-reg side can argue that they're simply responding to the pro-reg 'aggression' - but was doing nothing an option, after Stamford? In resisting registration, they're prioritising their ideals above the practical safety and stability of the United States - is it worth that, simply to be able to use tactical-level powers however you see fit, whether or not you be trained, mature, or accountable? Would accepting registration, and working to eliminate whatever corruption arose during a peaceful transition, really be more damaging to the nation than inciting a conflict and arguably radicalising both sides?

I'm not saying it is or it isn't - ideals are important. But they're not the only things that are important. I agree that the pro-reg side are appearing more unsympathetic at this stage - but that's realistic, I think. Does that perception mean that they are more wrong than the anti-reg side?

[Soundrave]

It'll be interesting to see how sympathetic Tony is portrayed in September's CIVIL WAR FILES one-shot. It's apparently all told from his perspective and includes analysis on the other superhuman players in Civil War. Will they play Tony up as a genuinely concerned citizen or as an unsympathetic, smug jackass of questionable sanity?

[Haunt]

I know it's been said in interviews that no side is "right" or "wrong" and that both sides would have pros and cons, but isn't it seeming like Marvel is skewing things to make the anti-registration side more heroic?

Tony's duplicity in hiring the Titanium Man to fight Spidy makes him look like a supreme bastard, regardless of what his motivations are. He's got noble ideals with what he wants to accomplish with registration, but he's stooping to "evil" means to do it. Many, myself included, see this act as being out-of-character for Tony Stark.


you're neglecting to mention that Tony was anti-registration at the time of him hiring Titanium Man. Stamford screwed it up for him.


Tony requesting that the Thunderbolts recruit villians to the pro-registration cause is a complete and utter disaster waiting to happen, and I'm really surprised that someone as smart as Tony can't see this. Can anyone else see this backfiring BIG TIME???


of course, the Thunderbolts are considered heroes at the moment. he's giving them a chance to step up and make a difference. Tony might not have any hope of them turning criminals to the pro-registration side but be satisfied that the villains are captured/off the streets. it's expensive to house regular criminals. imagine how much it costs to hold the U-Foes. and Stark has every reason to trust Zemo's crew (really Songbird's crew) to do this. they are all reformed villains who have already worked for the CSA.

[overcomebyfumes]

of course, the Thunderbolts are considered heroes at the moment. he's giving them a chance to step up and make a difference. Tony might not have any hope of them turning criminals to the pro-registration side but be satisfied that the villains are captured/off the streets. it's expensive to house regular criminals. imagine how much it costs to hold the U-Foes. and Stark has every reason to trust Zemo's crew (really Songbird's crew) to do this. they are all reformed villains who have already worked for the CSA.

I mean the disaster waiting to happen when they actually recruit some super-villians to the pro-reg side. Some may actually want to reform, like the T-Bolts, but some will just want the chance to play Thugs-With-A-Badge. Imagine the Wrecking Crew with badges. They would leap at the chance to have the power to smack someone down with the state's sanction, I'm sure. It's got super-powered police brutality written all over it.

[Alan2099]

I'm waiting for some supervillian to get ahold of the registration list and start using it as a checklist of where he needs to show up in the middle of the night with a shotgun.

[Mitchel]

In recruiting super-villains to help capture unregistered heroes it creates an environment were the law can be abused easily. We know that once Spider-man goes anti-registration he will have a bunch of his foes working pro-registration going after him. This and other scenarios are going to make the anti-registration heroes as martyrs, not to mention the government sanctioned facilities rumors that we are starting to read about. Its unfortunate for the heroes that Marvel has selected to put on the Pro-registration side, I fear once the Civil War is over they won't be able to recuperate from the stigma.

[Haunt]

I mean the disaster waiting to happen when they actually recruit some super-villians to the pro-reg side. Some may actually want to reform, like the T-Bolts, but some will just want the chance to play Thugs-With-A-Badge. Imagine the Wrecking Crew with badges. They would leap at the chance to have the power to smack someone down with the state's sanction, I'm sure. It's got super-powered police brutality written all over it.


but Tony's a futurist. it might not make sense to you to start recruiting villains but think of the reverse of that situation. who would villains, naturally, side with? these are people who openly flaunt the law and take great measure to hide themselves from the authorities. i could see the supervillains becoming the allies of the anti-registration crowd. Tony's just trying to level the playing field. super-powered thugs with badges aren't any more dangerous than super-powered thugs with no accountability.

[overcomebyfumes]

I agree that the pro-reg side are appearing more unsympathetic at this stage - but that's realistic, I think. Does that perception mean that they are more wrong than the anti-reg side?

No the pro-reg side is not "more wrong" just on the face of their arguments - actually, the arguments advanced by the anti-reg side are pretty alarming. Were this actually going on in the real world, I'd be strongly pro-registration. I need a license to drive a car, but not to pick one up and throw it at someone?

But actually reading the comics, rather than a balanced portrayal of the sides, I find myself rooting for Cap, who I don't even agree with, and I'm finding it difficult to sympathize with Tony.

The deck is being slanted, and I don't feel that we're getting the unbiased portrayal that we were promised. Am I enjoying the story? Hell, yeah. But it's not what I expected as far as the two sides being balanced.

Pax.

[shaunyc56]

I've listened to the arguments here and first Tony has always been shown to be a little "less than straight shooting", which isn't a slight to him. Other heroes like Black Panther, Batman, etc, know you can't always get the job done w/ the apple pie approach.

Second, there aren't gonna be any Pro reg supervillians hunting down rouge heroes, Ironman wouldn't even let the T-bolts do it and there supposed to be heroes now.

My main contention with Tony is my main Contention with Regulation period, what happens when a politician who is on the take, or behind something just asks one of his high ranking buddies or just orders a Sheild agent to give up some heroes name.

Ironman doesn't have to worry about this, but some guy whose mask was his only protection is gonna get killed.

[agrich]

Some of the most popular characters are pro-registration. Iron Man, Spider-Man, Mr. Fantastic, She-Hulk - these are a lot of fans' favorite characters. Anti-reg? Captain America, Cloak and Dagger, Young Avengers, and whoever is pretending to be Daredevil.

The story is what it is: the government wants to pass a hero registration act, they've got SHIELD to enforce it, and SHIELD has some heavy hitter heroes to help enforce it. If you think the anti-reg side comes off better, maybe it's simply because their anti-reg stance is more reasonable. It's not like the pro-reg side is out murdering innocents; they're out there ENFORCING THE LAW, period. I don't see the slant you do. I simply see that I agree with one side more than the other, both coming into the series and based on the first two issues. If Tony looks bad, maybe that's because he's on the wrong side - working with a corrupt and fascist SHIELD organization to promote a knee-jerk law. Course, that's just my opinion.

[XPac]

but Tony's a futurist. it might not make sense to you to start recruiting villains but think of the reverse of that situation. who would villains, naturally, side with? these are people who openly flaunt the law and take great measure to hide themselves from the authorities. i could see the supervillains becoming the allies of the anti-registration crowd. Tony's just trying to level the playing field. super-powered thugs with badges aren't any more dangerous than super-powered thugs with no accountability.

No, but they might be more dangerous if they're organized and united under Baron Zemo's control. Tony may not be quite as good a futurist as he thinks he is.

[Alan2099]

Some of the most popular characters are pro-registration. Iron Man, Spider-Man, Mr. Fantastic, She-Hulk - these are a lot of fans' favorite characters.
And look at ironman and Spider-man. Ironman was initialy against it and said that it was going to happen anyway, so why fight it?

Spider-man had to be strongly talked into it and preassured by Ironman.

Mr. Fantastic ... well, Reed is Reed. he's got all the people skills of a bag of grass clippings.

I haven't seen anybody that's as Dead-set certain they're doing the right thing by registering as opposed to the anti-crowd that strongly belives in what they're doing.

[XPac]

And look at ironman and Spider-man. Ironman was initialy against it and said that it was going to happen anyway, so why fight it?

Spider-man had to be strongly talked into it and preassured by Ironman.

Mr. Fantastic ... well, Reed is Reed. he's got all the people skills of a bag of grass clippings.

I haven't seen anybody that's as Dead-set certain they're doing the right thing by registering as opposed to the anti-crowd that strongly belives in what they're doing.

Yeah, that's a good point. It's probably a bit harder for us to really beleive that Tony is doing the right thing when he himself has doubts about it.

Cap, whether you argee with him or not, seems to have more conviction. If all else is equal, I do think it's easier to believe he's doing the right thing simply because you know HE believes he's doing the right thing. Tony is less convincing because he's seemingly trying to convince HIMSELF.

[agrich]

And look at ironman and Spider-man. Ironman was initialy against it and said that it was going to happen anyway, so why fight it?

Spider-man had to be strongly talked into it and preassured by Ironman.

Mr. Fantastic ... well, Reed is Reed. he's got all the people skills of a bag of grass clippings.

I haven't seen anybody that's as Dead-set certain they're doing the right thing by registering as opposed to the anti-crowd that strongly belives in what they're doing.

As I said, I'm anti-registration. The point was just that if Marvel was going out of their way to slant the storyline to favor that side, you'd think they'd give Captain America more to work with than Cloak and Dagger, and wouldn't have their flagship character, Spider-man, on the pro-registration side, whether he was pressured or not.

As for people having doubts and/or having to be pressured, well, there are two schools of thought. One is that Marvel is unfairly slanting the coverage. The other is that the law is what it is, and if the pro side looks less attractive to most fans, maybe it's because it simply is.

[Miss Kitty Fantastico]

Cap, whether you argee with him or not, seems to have more conviction.
To a point - but I don't think we've seen Cap with his guard down, the way Tony was in that scene. They both know all about morale - in public (or in Cap's case, in front of the people he's relying on, and who he knows will have to trust him and believe in him) they're both resolute and decisive. In private, Tony is obviously troubled by what he feels it's necessary for him to do, and hopes that he's not going down the wrong path. Cap - we haven't seen on his own. But as a soldier and a patriot, disobeying orders, encouraging others to break the law, and organising a military force against the lawful representatives of the United States... these things can't be easy for him.

As for people having doubts and/or having to be pressured, well, there are two schools of thought. One is that Marvel is unfairly slanting the coverage. The other is that the law is what it is, and if the pro side looks less attractive to most fans, maybe it's because it simply is.
Or perhaps it simply looks less attractive - like eating health food, it doesn't taste as good as the other stuff, but it's what's best for you. I think that may be conscious on Marvel's part, but not because they're simply pushing the anti-reg side - they must have known going in that people would instinctively side with anti-reg, as representing the superhero status quo we know and love. Perhaps rather than trying to make the pro-reg side seem more attractive to compensate, they're using our expected reactions to their advantage, setting us up to respond in a certain way now so as to have a greater impact later in the story, when the facts are laid out plain.

There was a great example of this recently in She-Hulk #6-7: the story opens with an introduction to Starfox designed to plant him in readers' minds as a humourous rogue - which is how, all things being equal, a character like that would normally be written. There's clues to the truth throughout the story, but it's really only in the end, when you get the plain facts, that you realise you've been subconsciously ignoring the clues because they don't correspond to the mental image you have of Starfox, that you want to maintain. At least, that was my experience - it was actually quite a troubling realisation. Excellent writing there.

[shaunyc56]

[QUOTE=agrich]As I said, I'm anti-registration. The point was just that if Marvel was going out of their way to slant the storyline to favor that side, you'd think they'd give Captain America more to work with than Cloak and Dagger, and wouldn't have their flagship character, Spider-man, on the pro-registration side, whether he was pressured or not.


I think there putting lesser known guys on the Anti side because invariably that will be the side painted as heroes when all is said and done. Underdogs always make better heroes. Also they can reintroduce these characters through this story and maybe we can get some ongoing monthlies or miniseries out of it. Cloak and Dagger, Powerman and Ironfist, etc...

[agrich]

Look, a lot of the anti-reg sentiment is unavoidable because each reader brings their own experiences and frame of reference to the table. Not because it's being painted a certain way, not because of a love of underdogs, but because it is what it is.

Do you, personally, tend to trust and respect the government? If you do, it's easier to be pro-reg. If you don't, it's easier not to be. I'm sure a lot more of us are at least slightly distrustful of the government, for one reason or another, than believe everything they do is good and right.

As for "what's better for me," I guess I"m the kind of person who likes to make those decisions for myself, rather than have the government make those decisions for me. Eating health food might be what's best for you, but I imagine you'd like to decide that for yourself, as opposed to going into the grocery store and having guards posted at the chips and snacks aisle to keep you out. :)

[AnthonyJ]

That's it exactly. We see Tony's conflicted (in a fantastic scene btw) - we don't see the same with Cap. We're not sure if Tony's doing the right thing, but we're sure as hell that Cap is.
We don't see anything about Cap's thinking or motivation. He might well be conflicted, but without more focus on him, we have no way of telling.

[Bobster777]

Look, a lot of the anti-reg sentiment is unavoidable because each reader brings their own experiences and frame of reference to the table. Not because it's being painted a certain way, not because of a love of underdogs, but because it is what it is.

Do you, personally, tend to trust and respect the government? If you do, it's easier to be pro-reg. If you don't, it's easier not to be. I'm sure a lot more of us are at least slightly distrustful of the government, for one reason or another, than believe everything they do is good and right.

As for "what's better for me," I guess I"m the kind of person who likes to make those decisions for myself, rather than have the government make those decisions for me. Eating health food might be what's best for you, but I imagine you'd like to decide that for yourself, as opposed to going into the grocery store and having guards posted at the chips and snacks aisle to keep you out. :)

For me, the reason why it is a little harder to just say, "civil liberties first, no registration," what the super heroes do doesn't just affect them. Their actions affect the lives of so many people around them may it be directly or indirectly. The fact it, I'd be afraid if any joe smoe out there can just decide to be a cop (because they want to do good) and bust down houses where they think criminal activity is going on. When actions affect other people, civil liberties becomes a hard concept to protect.

[agrich]

That's a good point, but the problem exists anyway. If there were an organization like SHIELD operating largely under its own authority, enslaving people and committing mass murder in the Savage Land, blowing up office buildings to capture vigilantes, and pulling a bunch of guns on Captain America simply because he expressed reluctance to support a law that by the way hadn't even been passed yet, how safe would I feel? And if I'm worried about superheroes actions affecting my life, does that really change if they work for SHIELD? I mean, being registered and having training doesn't mean they're not going to engage a team of supervillains in the vicinity of my home or anything.

[firestarfan]

The problem with Civil War's Neutrality is the very reason we're all reading it - and, in fact, the very reason Marvel Comics even still exists.

We see the anti-reg side as being persecuted for actions that - for the last 40+ years - have been persented to us, week-in, week-out, as heroic. Yes, what the New Warriors did was stupid, but they're heroes. If the event that kicked off Civil War #1 had occurred at any other point in the New Warriors' history, or in literally any other context ever in the history of comic books, it would have been presented very clearly by the writers that Nitro was the bad guy, and the New Warriors were the heroes. This is the context in which literally just about every comic book story ever told has been presented in, and now - all of a sudden - we're being shown a different perspective.

And from that new perspective, yes the Pro-Reg side makes perfect sense, and seems logical and reasonable. But we've got two months of stories showing us that side. We've got 40+ years of Marvel history giving us the other side.

It's natural that the Anti-Reg side looks like the heroes, and the Pro side looks like the villians. This is how it would be, if this story was being told in ANY OTHER CONTEXT, EVER.

The Anti-Reg side is Robin Hood. The Three Musketeers. The American Revolutionaries. Moses crossing the desert. David facing down Goliath. The 1980 US Hockey Team. Rocky, Rambo, and Weird Al in "UHF." In almost every story ever told by anybody, comic book or otherwise, the people in the position of the Anti-Reg side would be considered the heroes.

Sure, Marvel tells us that they're telling the story from both sides, and presenting equal perspectives. And honestly, there's no doubt in my mind that they're doing the best they can. But they have to fight against forty years of their own history...and thousands upon thousands of years of stories to do so, which is not an easy task to undertake.


Plus, Iron Man is a dick.

[Bobster777]

That's a good point, but the problem exists anyway. If there were an organization like SHIELD operating largely under its own authority, enslaving people and committing mass murder in the Savage Land, blowing up office buildings to capture vigilantes, and pulling a bunch of guns on Captain America simply because he expressed reluctance to support a law that by the way hadn't even been passed yet, how safe would I feel? And if I'm worried about superheroes actions affecting my life, does that really change if they work for SHIELD? I mean, being registered and having training doesn't mean they're not going to engage a team of supervillains in the vicinity of my home or anything.

I guess the thing with that is, if you are registered, atleast you are culpable for your actions. I can see your face, pull you out of a line up, and sue you. However, that's hard to do with someone in a mask. I don't want some lose understanding between super heroes (if you do bad we'll come after you) to determine how someone gets punished if I get hurt as a result of wreckless super hero activity. Ha ha, well, this is how I would think of it if this was really going on.

[Serik]

firestar, the only superhero you can call a dick is Superman :D

http://www.superdickery.com/dick/1.html

The anti-reg side has another bonus, in that SHIELD - the chief registration enforcement agency - is suspected of being corrupt. No one wants to trust this info to a corrupt agency. If the pro-reg side really wants to make headway, they need to create a government organization that can be trusted. Perhaps not 100%, but more so than the current SHIELD.

[shaunyc56]

firestar, the only superhero you can call a dick is Superman :D

http://www.superdickery.com/dick/1.html

The anti-reg side has another bonus, in that SHIELD - the chief registration enforcement agency - is suspected of being corrupt. No one wants to trust this info to a corrupt agency. If the pro-reg side really wants to make headway, they need to create a government organization that can be trusted. Perhaps not 100%, but more so than the current SHIELD.


Nah, theyre both dicks, Ironman is just a shiny one.

[Alan2099]

I guess the thing with that is, if you are registered, atleast you are culpable for your actions. I can see your face, pull you out of a line up, and sue you. However, that's hard to do with someone in a mask. I don't want some lose understanding between super heroes (if you do bad we'll come after you) to determine how someone gets punished if I get hurt as a result of wreckless super hero activity. Ha ha, well, this is how I would think of it if this was really going on.
Two of your points are already addressed previously.
You can actually sue a Superhero by identity. You don't have to know their real name.
Also the Marvel Universe actually has Superhero insurance as well as certain nonproffit organizations dedicated just to fixing the results of any major mess that's been mae.
There's also Code Blue, a elite police unit that's only used for super criminals.

The marvel legal system has already figured in super powered people without even having a list of who's realy who.

[Bobster777]

Two of your points are already addressed previously.
You can actually sue a Superhero by identity. You don't have to know their real name.
Also the Marvel Universe actually has Superhero insurance as well as certain nonproffit organizations dedicated just to fixing the results of any major mess that's been mae.
There's also Code Blue, a elite police unit that's only used for super criminals.

The marvel legal system has already figured in super powered people without even having a list of who's realy who.

You can sue them, but if they chose to disappear, what can you do then. If a person's identity is known, the gov can go after their bank account and assets. That same can't be said for a super hero whose identity if public knowledge. I haven't been reading She-Hulk all that much. Has anyone actually won a lawsuit against the heroes?

[Wessner]

I do think that so far we've see the Pro-Reg side in a fairly conflicted light and that makes them seem less heroic. They hope they're doing the right thing by supporting registration, but they're not sure. By contrast, we've seen the Anti-Reg side in much starker terms. They're very sure that they're doing the right thing by opposing registration. That sense of conviction in the face of adversity makes them seem more heroic.

We've also see the Pro-Reg side use some tactics that look pretty shifty. So far the Anti-Reg side hasn't really fought back. But when they do I don't think they're going to be all squeaky clean in their use of tactics. It will be interesting to see what readers think when the war heats up and we start to see people on both sides doing some really horrible stuff.

[Haunt]

No, but they might be more dangerous if they're organized and united under Baron Zemo's control. Tony may not be quite as good a futurist as he thinks he is.

you're forgetting about Songbird. she's who the T-bolts are currently following. the others don't trust Zemo. he's using behavior modification equipment. that could easily backfire on him.

[XPac]

you're forgetting about Songbird. she's who the T-bolts are currently following. the others don't trust Zemo. he's using behavior modification equipment. that could easily backfire on him.

I'm not forgetting about Songbird, or the fact that he's using some level of brainwashing to get loyalty.

I'm merely saying that Tony's plan to have Zemo go about collecting supervillians is placing a lot of trust on someone that frankly doesn't deserve it. It's just one in a possibly long line of decisions Tony may come to regret in the future. But if he's the futurist he CLAIMES to be hopefully he'll have some sort of mechanism in place to deal with Zemo IF/when the need arises. But we'll see.

[Bobster777]

you're forgetting about Songbird. she's who the T-bolts are currently following. the others don't trust Zemo. he's using behavior modification equipment. that could easily backfire on him.

It seems that Zemo has her wrapped around his finger though. Hopefully though, if he is a bad guy, she'll see straight through his charade.

[Haunt]

It seems that Zemo has her wrapped around his finger though. Hopefully though, if he is a bad guy, she'll see straight through his charade.


you must have missed a couple issues. Songbird plans to take him down; hard.

[Bobster777]

you must have missed a couple issues. Songbird plans to take him down; hard.

Oh really, crap, I guess I did. That's good to hear. I really want her to take control of this team finally.

[AllisterH]

One of the questions I haven't seen answered is the CIVIL LIBERTIES of the normal populace discussed. One of the fears of the anti-side is the resulting rules/legalities that would prevent heroes from doing their job.

In real life, private detectives can NOT work with the police a la Batman. The ACLU would literally jump all over the government as trying to get around the regulations that keep said police in check (Miranda Rights, search and seizure, etc.)

I'll use Batman for example. Batman regularly gets called to the police commissioner and given access to information that a normal citizen doesn't get. He then regularly breaks into people's houses, beats them up, gets the information and drops it on the commissioner's desk.

Yeah, right. This ISN'T a MASSIVE infringement of the civil liberties of the normal populace? More importantly, when the Avengers/Cap told the government they were going to be independent YET they still expected the rights/privileges of the government, people though THIS WAS A GOOD THING?

Like a previous poster has said, we're coming against 40 years of this being accepted, but logically, realistically, do you honestly want a group of people to have all the rights/privileges of the government (have access to classified/personal information, allowed to carry weapons of destruction) but none of the responsibilities?

[Alan2099]

One of the questions I haven't seen answered is the CIVIL LIBERTIES of the normal populace discussed. One of the fears of the anti-side is the resulting rules/legalities that would prevent heroes from doing their job.

In real life, private detectives can NOT work with the police a la Batman. The ACLU would literally jump all over the government as trying to get around the regulations that keep said police in check (Miranda Rights, search and seizure, etc.)

I'll use Batman for example. Batman regularly gets called to the police commissioner and given access to information that a normal citizen doesn't get. He then regularly breaks into people's houses, beats them up, gets the information and drops it on the commissioner's desk.

Yeah, right. This ISN'T a MASSIVE infringement of the civil liberties of the normal populace? More importantly, when the Avengers/Cap told the government they were going to be independent YET they still expected the rights/privileges of the government, people though THIS WAS A GOOD THING?

Like a previous poster has said, we're coming against 40 years of this being accepted, but logically, realistically, do you honestly want a group of people to have all the rights/privileges of the government (have access to classified/personal information, allowed to carry weapons of destruction) but none of the responsibilities?
See, that's the major problem. People are trying to apply real world logic where it doesn't fit. How intresting would it be for Batman to go swing into the Comishoner's office and then get arrested for tresspasing?

The comics world has things you just have to accept as being "not the way we do things," that's how it's always been. When you try to take that away, you hurt lots of the characters and plotlines. Youi can only be so realistic before you reach a point where you just have to go, "Okay, this doesn't work anymore."

real life is dull anyway. Who wants to read about how things should "realistically" be.

[Lochdale]

I don't know...I think if Marvel were going out of their way to make things seem fair and balanced, it would read pretty fake and forced. In Civil War we have seen a scene or two with Stark conflicted over his actions, as well as Reed Richards pointing out the results of superheroes continuing to proliferate unchecked. I personally am anti-registration, but the fact that there are plenty of people here who ARE on the pro-registration side indicates that Marvel has done enough to make some people feel the pros are right. If Marvel had a scene of Stark being conflicted after every controversial decision, after a while it would seem pretty heavy-handed.

And with that said, Marvel's job is only to tell a good story, not necessarily a fair and balanced one.

See I fundamentally disagree with you here. Marvel has not presented both sides of the argument. The reason people are pro-regristration is because regristration makes sense and not because Marvel has given the pro side a fair shake. The fact is, if there were superpowered beings running around then I would want them under civilian control. Just like we have the military under control. You can't assume that real people will be cardboard cutout heroes like the comics. Which are, you know, totally fictitious.

Registration makes sense despite Marvel's best efforts.

[Haunt]

See I fundamentally disagree with you here. Marvel has not presented both sides of the argument. The reason people are pro-regristration is because regristration makes sense and not because Marvel has given the pro side a fair shake.

so, then what Marvel is doing is leveling the playing field. if pro-registration makes sense, then why bother selling it to us? it's better, then, to just make the anti-crowd as a sympathetic as possible.

[XPac]

I don't think you can really use real life comparrisons, because you have to consider that in the Marvel Universe vigilanet heroes have been the status quo for decades and it's a system that for the most part was worked VERY well.

There have been mistakes and odds are there will be more, but the fact remains that the heroes have done an almost unrealisticallyu phemonical job keeping both heroes and villians in check.

In the real word YES we would be worried about superhumans, but we're not in the same boat as the people in Marvel who have lived with the status quo relatively comfortably.

Also, if you wanna talk real world cost consider that the registrataion will likely cost tax payers MILLIONS of dollard for a service most heroes are doing for FREE. Even taking Stanford into context, I'm not sure the heroes overall are doing a bad enough job to justify spending millions to alter the status quo.

[agrich]

Marvel has not presented both sides of the argument. The reason people are pro-regristration is because regristration makes sense and not because Marvel has given the pro side a fair shake.

Out of curiosity, what are the pro arguments that you feel Marvel hasn't touched on?

I'm not reading all the tie-ins, but in two issues of Civil War alone Iron Man, Reed Richards, Spider-man, Director Hill, and the SHIELD agent to Cap have given arguments in favor of it. Spider-man's in particular was fairly compelling. So what are the arguments none of these characters mentioned?

In contrast, we haven't seen many characters making the anti- argument. Just Cap.

Go ahead and disagree, but don't think it's because I don't realize it's all fiction or anything. And again, I think Marvel's "best efforts" to slant the argument in favor of anti-reg probably wouldn't have included Spider-Man and some of Marvel's other more popular characters on the pro-registration side. For all the complaining here, I think thus far Spider-Man has come off the most heroic.

[Haunt]

I don't think you can really use real life comparrisons, because you have to consider that in the Marvel Universe vigilanet heroes have been the status quo for decades and it's a system that for the most part was worked VERY well.

There have been mistakes and odds are there will be more, but the fact remains that the heroes have done an almost unrealisticallyu phemonical job keeping both heroes and villians in check.


i'd blame the growing number of supervillains on superheroes, actually. it's the Batman-syndrome. crooks see a guy in spandex doing whatever the hell he wants without any accountability and it puts ideas in their heads. how many villains popped up after Spiderman's debut, for instance? i remember that back in the tales to astonish days, it was just regular humans finding ways to take down actual monsters.


Also, if you wanna talk real world cost consider that the registrataion will likely cost tax payers MILLIONS of dollard for a service most heroes are doing for FREE. Even taking Stanford into context, I'm not sure the heroes overall are doing a bad enough job to justify spending millions to alter the status quo.

not nearly as costly as Stamford or your average marvel citizen's life insurance with superheroes playing wild wild west all over the place.

[XPac]

not nearly as costly as Stamford or your average marvel citizen's life insurance with superheroes playing wild wild west all over the place.

If you're implying that propery damage and death's won't occur anymore now that heroes are registered, I disagree.

There MIGHT be less if we're dealing with better trained heroes... then again there might be MORE if there's a smaller pool of heroes out there dealing with these problems. There's no way of knowing either way.

But the registration at least will have a base cost behind it. And that will likely cost millions if not more.

[XPac]

i'd blame the growing number of supervillains on superheroes, actually. it's the Batman-syndrome. crooks see a guy in spandex doing whatever the hell he wants without any accountability and it puts ideas in their heads. how many villains popped up after Spiderman's debut, for instance? i remember that back in the tales to astonish days, it was just regular humans finding ways to take down actual monsters.




I never saw the logic here.

The fact is the number of metahumans PERIOD began to rise. Some chose to become villians. Some chose to become heroes. To blame one for the rise of the other is ridulous ...that to me is taking away accountability.

[Haunt]

I never saw the logic here.

The fact is the number of metahumans PERIOD began to rise. Some chose to become villians. Some chose to become heroes. To blame one for the rise of the other is ridulous ...that to me is taking away accountability.


paste pot pete, wizard, and the red ghost owe their existence to the Fantastic Four.

Stilt-Man, Beetle, Vulture, Porcupine, Shocker, etc. these aren't metahumans. they are people who wanted respect, so they put costumes on. why do you think they chose that route (w/ Spiderman on the front page of the Bugle)?

there are a number of villains who exist because they have a vendetta against a particular hero. Bullseye would just be a run-of-the-mill hitman if not for Daredevil. Count Nefaria might not have powers. Ultron wouldn't be around. Venom wouldn't be around. so on and so on.

[XPac]

Stilt-Man, Beetle, Vulture, Porcupine, Shocker, etc. these aren't metahumans. they are people who wanted respect, so they put costumes on. why do you think they chose that route (w/ Spiderman on the front page of the Bugle)?

ton.

Right... the route they chose had nothing to do with them being lousy human but rather seeing Spiderman on the front page of the Bugle.

Two words... COP OUT.

There were thieves and murderes long before Spiderman and there will be thieves and murderes long after him. The cause of that is the weakness of human character... that will exist regardless of the Spiderman and Batman and regardless of whether the Spiderman and Batman are registered or not.

[firestarfan]

Uh...hey guys, those bad guys chose that route because Stan Lee wanted to sell comic books.

I think he'd have felt bad putting "The World's Greatest Comic Magazine" on "The Fantastic Four vs. the Average and un-powered four." Or "Spider-Man vs. Bob."

The main point is, civilians in the Marvel Universe have had to deal with the f&#%ing COMING OF GALACTUS. Aside from the brilliant "Marvels" series, we almost never, ever see the civilian perspective on superheroes presented as a rational or reasonable one. Because the books aren't about civilians. If superhumans started running around in Ghost World, or The Waiting Place or American Splendor, then yes, the Pro-Reg side would be a perfectly normal one.

But in the Marvel Universe, any and all attempts by anyone, at any time, ever, to reign in superheroes has been a negative one. As readers, it wouldn't matter how fairly Marvel presented the arguements, it would feel to US - the readers - as though the Pro Side was wrong, and the Anti Side was right.

[firestarfan]

Also, Iron Man is ... well, you know.

[diana_fan]

Ok, first let me say that the only Marvel I read is ASTONISHING and SHE-HULK. I am (almost) completely a DC guy. So, really, I don't know what the hell I am talking about.

Second, my friend is buying CIVIL WAR, not I. So I don't have it in front of me, nor have I read anything but the two CIVIL WAR issues and the first FRONT LINE issue. In other words, I am ignorant.

That being said, none of this makes sense. At all. What if all the heroes who are against registration just said "OK, we are retiring. The next time there is some horrible calamity, don't call us. Write your Senator. I'm sure that will help. Of course, by that time, your sister will have been tortured and killed ... but hey! At least you kept us in our place. It's been nice saving your lives, every other day, for decades. But it's over. Bye bye. Have a nice death."

And then in CW #2, what's his name? Patriot? Was stopping someone from being mugged, when agents started to shoot at him, and ended up blowing up an entire floor of an office building. So ... let me get this straight: Guy helping out citizens, trying to keep them safe, in the end doesn't keep them safe (shot at), and an entire floor of a building is exploded. And this is supposed to be HELPING society? How, exactly?

And, just as a side question, is Sue always this much of a submissive? Does she always get treated by her husband like she is just stupid, untrustworthy, and not worth taking time to talk to? And does she always just say "Yes, sir" and take it? Sheesh. What are her likeable qualities?

[StoneGold]

Ok, first let me say that the only Marvel I read is ASTONISHING and SHE-HULK. I am (almost) completely a DC guy. So, really, I don't know what the hell I am talking about.

Second, my friend is buying CIVIL WAR, not I. So I don't have it in front of me, nor have I read anything but the two CIVIL WAR issues and the first FRONT LINE issue. In other words, I am ignorant.

That being said, none of this makes sense. At all. What if all the heroes who are against registration just said "OK, we are retiring. The next time there is some horrible calamity, don't call us. Write your Senator. I'm sure that will help. Of course, by that time, your sister will have been tortured and killed ... but hey! At least you kept us in our place. It's been nice saving your lives, every other day, for decades. But it's over. Bye bye. Have a nice death."

And then in CW #2, what's his name? Patriot? Was stopping someone from being mugged, when agents started to shoot at him, and ended up blowing up an entire floor of an office building. So ... let me get this straight: Guy helping out citizens, trying to keep them safe, in the end doesn't keep them safe (shot at), and an entire floor of a building is exploded. And this is supposed to be HELPING society? How, exactly?

Go read a book about the civil rights movement in the US. That will answer most of your quetions. And the building wasn't blown up. That was a gas bomb. Just a lot of gas. Because explosions tend not to be green and vaporous.


And, just as a side question, is Sue always this much of a submissive? Does she always get treated by her husband like she is just stupid, untrustworthy, and not worth taking time to talk to? And does she always just say "Yes, sir" and take it? Sheesh. What are her likeable qualities?[/QUOTE]
No. Every once in a while, she gets taken over by some sort of anger elemental named Malice and beats the crap out of everyone. The problem is, even if he has next to no social skills, 99/100, Reed is right. The rest of the four have it kind of by instinct at this point to just do what Stretcho says, let the pieces fall into place later.

[Drakenred]

Actualy it was probably a gas bomb with either a Stingball or a flash bang, (or both) both of which have been know to blow out windows.

[diana_fan]

Go read a book about the civil rights movement in the US. That will answer most of your quetions. And the building wasn't blown up. That was a gas bomb. Just a lot of gas. Because explosions tend not to be green and vaporous.



Ok, I guess I was wrong about the building. Didn't one of the agents even ask about it? Maybe I was too amazed that they would stop him from breaking up a mugging to shoot at him.

As to the Civil Rights movement, there you are talking about a group of people who are disenfranchised and looking to achieve some rights in the society. In the situation in CIVIL WAR, you are looking at a group of people who are super-powered, saving the world day after day, not disenfranchised at all, and possibly looking at having their rights taken away.

What exactly was the analogy again?

[Serik]

having their rights taken away.

What rights, exactly? I didn't think operating outside the law was a right...

[StoneGold]

What rights, exactly? I didn't think operating outside the law was a right...
See, that's the weird thing, in the MU, it is.

[diana_fan]

What rights, exactly? I didn't think operating outside the law was a right...

Like I said, I am a DC guy. I am very ignorant of 616. I don't pretend to know what the heck I'm talking about.

But, at least in the DCU, Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, and the rest are, to a degree, "operating outside the law". But if I am a citizen in the DCU, and Ares comes to try and destroy reality, I end up very happy that someone, anyone, in this case Diana, saves the whole friggin' Universe. The law applies to certain things: those things are laid out in the criminal code. There isn't really an entry for "Attempts to destroy the Universe." So, that's where Wonder Woman steps in. That's where Supes saves the day. That's where Batman achieves his Dark Knight status.

Again, what if all the most powerful heroes just retired, and left everyone to their own devices? What if there were no heroes to save the world? What if Darkseid or Imperiex or whoever succeeded in destroying the Earth? Or enslaving it? How does the government forcing the heroes to live by Gov rules make the world a better a place?

[Kevinroc]

Like I said, I am a DC guy. I am very ignorant of 616. I don't pretend to know what the heck I'm talking about.

But, at least in the DCU, Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, and the rest are, to a degree, "operating outside the law". But if I am a citizen in the DCU, and Ares comes to try and destroy reality, I end up very happy that someone, anyone, in this case Diana, saves the whole friggin' Universe. The law applies to certain things: those things are laid out in the criminal code. There isn't really an entry for "Attempts to destroy the Universe." So, that's where Wonder Woman steps in. That's where Supes saves the day. That's where Batman achieves his Dark Knight status.

Again, what if all the most powerful heroes just retired, and left everyone to their own devices? What if there were no heroes to save the world? What if Darkseid or Imperiex or whoever succeeded in destroying the Earth? Or enslaving it? How does the government forcing the heroes to live by Gov rules make the world a better a place?

It makes the general population of Marvel Earth feel safer to know that the super heroes are well-trained and prepared instead of literally just throwing on a costume and doing whatever.

The entire story is this big allegory to the notion that the general population are willing to do whatever they can, like give up their rights or the rights of others, for that feeling of security.

Here's an example from Operation: Zero Tolerance, where the US Government pretty much tried to take down all mutants in the wake of Onslaught.

http://community.livejournal.com/scans_daily/2033370.html#cutid1

[diana_fan]

It makes the general population of Marvel Earth feel safer to know that the super heroes are well-trained and prepared instead of literally just throwing on a costume and doing whatever.

The entire story is this big allegory to the notion that the general population are willing to do whatever they can, like give up their rights or the rights of others, for that feeling of security.

Here's an example from Operation: Zero Tolerance, where the US Government pretty much tried to take down all mutants in the wake of Onslaught.

http://community.livejournal.com/scans_daily/2033370.html#cutid1

I understand that it is an attempt at allegory.

But what if Spidey and the rest just said "OK, you win. We retire. You handle your own problems from now on. Don't ask for our help, since you don't think we know what we are doing. Bye bye." Where would everyone be then?

[StoneGold]

I understand that it is an attempt at allegory.

But what if Spidey and the rest just said "OK, you win. We retire. You handle your own problems from now on. Don't ask for our help, since you don't think we know what we are doing. Bye bye." Where would everyone be then?
But they can't do that. "With great power comes great responsibility."

[Kevinroc]

I understand that it is an attempt at allegory.

But what if Spidey and the rest just said "OK, you win. We retire. You handle your own problems from now on. Don't ask for our help, since you don't think we know what we are doing. Bye bye." Where would everyone be then?

Relying on SHIELD. And we'd probably see a massive influx into the military budget of Marvel Earth. After all, DC Earth didn't explode after The Justice Society retired.

But that wouldn't be very heroic to just give up. It always kind of bothered me that DC's retcon to explain why the JSA didn't do anything in the post-Crisis on Infinite Earths history was that they just kinda gave up when the government cracked down on super heroes. They didn't fight for their rights. They just said "we retire."

Patriot suggested a strike but Reed Richards stated that wasn't a good idea in Civil War #1.

Remember Spider-Man's motto (as StoneGold just did), "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility."

[diana_fan]

Well, it seems like one must seriously turn this whole thing on its head to have it make sense. I've said everything I have to say. Obviously, it makes sense to you guys, so that's what is important.

Have fun.

[Kevinroc]

Well, it seems like one must seriously turn this whole thing on its head to have it make sense. I've said everything I have to say. Obviously, it makes sense to you guys, so that's what is important.

Have fun.

It's not as "turn it on its head" as you think. The SHIELD Agents that shoot at Patriot use non-lethal force. They shot tranqs and gas at him. He was under arrest for violating federal law.

Is there some wonky continuity bits? Yeah.

But the idea that the way the heroes can "beat this" is by telling everyone "okay, we're retiring" still doesn't change the fact that they have powers and they still have to register even if they did plan on retiring.

[Baal]

Im looking forward to the Moment where a really Pissed off Hulk comes back to Earth and SMASHES the crap outta every superhuman in the MU. Thats the only Reason im reading CW... HULK SMASH!!!

[XPac]

I do think that one way or the other the end result of Civil War will be a smaller number of heroes.

Many underage heroes will obviously be foreced to retire if the registration sticks around. Some adult ones may retire for a variety of reasons. Some may leave the country. Some may be hurt or even killed, which obviously will force them out of the game.

The real winners of the Civil War are likely the villians when all is said and done.

[Bobster777]

Ok, first let me say that the only Marvel I read is ASTONISHING and SHE-HULK. I am (almost) completely a DC guy. So, really, I don't know what the hell I am talking about.

Second, my friend is buying CIVIL WAR, not I. So I don't have it in front of me, nor have I read anything but the two CIVIL WAR issues and the first FRONT LINE issue. In other words, I am ignorant.

That being said, none of this makes sense. At all. What if all the heroes who are against registration just said "OK, we are retiring. The next time there is some horrible calamity, don't call us. Write your Senator. I'm sure that will help. Of course, by that time, your sister will have been tortured and killed ... but hey! At least you kept us in our place. It's been nice saving your lives, every other day, for decades. But it's over. Bye bye. Have a nice death."

And then in CW #2, what's his name? Patriot? Was stopping someone from being mugged, when agents started to shoot at him, and ended up blowing up an entire floor of an office building. So ... let me get this straight: Guy helping out citizens, trying to keep them safe, in the end doesn't keep them safe (shot at), and an entire floor of a building is exploded. And this is supposed to be HELPING society? How, exactly?

And, just as a side question, is Sue always this much of a submissive? Does she always get treated by her husband like she is just stupid, untrustworthy, and not worth taking time to talk to? And does she always just say "Yes, sir" and take it? Sheesh. What are her likeable qualities?

As for the heroes saying bye bye, some of them are going to choose to do that. As for other heroes like Spider Man, what makes them so great is that they don't take the easy way out. His sense of responsibility just won't let him do it.

As for Patriot, he was breaking the law. It is SHIELD's job to uphold the law so they were just doing their jobs. They didn't use any lethal force either. It was Patriot's decision to run. The law is simple, register, or stop doing super hero work.

Sue has always been patient with Reed like that. However, I don't think she'll be putting up with it anymore. I have a feeling that her conflict with Reed will be one of the focal points of Civil War. It's going to be the thing that tears FF apart for a while.

[XPac]

As for the heroes saying bye bye, some of them are going to choose to do that. As for other heroes like Spider Man, what makes them so great is that they don't take the easy way out. His sense of responsibility just won't let him do it.



Yeah, but here's the thing... not that Spiderman has publically outed himself, can he continue to function as a hero the same way he was before? A much bigger function in his job might now be to play bodyguard to the people in his life.

His wife and Aunt are lucky enough to live in a fortress (or unlucky enough to live in fortress that has a giant bullseye on it depending on how you look at it). But if you're a smart villian, and you might wanna go for the easier targets.

Peter has a lot of friends that don't live in a fortress. All of his students for starters. Or Flash Thompson maybe. Responsibility is always a key element in his life... but where does his greater responsibility lie? Probalby in protecting his friends and loved ones, and he certainly didn't do them any favors by outing himself.

Retiring is no longer an option for Spiderman since he'll likely be target for the rest of his life, whether he does the superhero bit or not. But now that he placed a bullseye his friends and family, to a degree at least his responsibilities and priorities might have to change, whether he likes it or not.

[Bobster777]

Yeah, but here's the thing... not that Spiderman has publically outed himself, can he continue to function as a hero the same way he was before? A much bigger function in his job might now be to play bodyguard to the people in his life.

His wife and Aunt are lucky enough to live in a fortress (or unlucky enough to live in fortress that has a giant bullseye on it depending on how you look at it). But if you're a smart villian, and you might wanna go for the easier targets.

Peter has a lot of friends that don't live in a fortress. All of his students for starters. Or Flash Thompson maybe. Responsibility is always a key element in his life... but where does his greater responsibility lie? Probalby in protecting his friends and loved ones, and he certainly didn't do them any favors by outing himself.

Retiring is no longer an option for Spiderman since he'll likely be target for the rest of his life, whether he does the superhero bit or not. But now that he placed a bullseye his friends and family, to a degree at least his responsibilities and priorities might have to change, whether he likes it or not.

The same thing can be said for the FF crew, but they don't go around protecting all the people they know twenty four seven.

In terms of responsibility, Peter made the choice he thought was best for everyone. If he tried to fight registration, Maria Hill would have made an example of him. She already knows his identity. They would have probably publicly arrested him and revealed his identity at the same time. He won't be able to protect anyone if he is in jail. In terms of his situation, revealing his identity was the most feasible thing to do, other than hanging up his tights all together which I don't think he could ever do since Peter is just too good of a person to stop helping others when they need it.

[XPac]

The same thing can be said for the FF crew, but they don't go around protecting all the people they know twenty four seven.

In terms of responsibility, Peter made the choice he thought was best for everyone. If he tried to fight registration, Maria Hill would have made an example of him. She already knows his identity. They would have probably publicly arrested him and revealed his identity at the same time. He won't be able to protect anyone if he is in jail. In terms of his situation, revealing his identity was the most feasible thing to do, other than hanging up his tights all together which I don't think he could ever do since Peter is just too good of a person to stop helping others when they need it.

Here's the thing... agreeing with the registration did not mean he had to publically reveal his identity in front of the press. I don't think if he registered but continued to keep his identity a secret to the public Maria Hill would make an example of him.

As for the FF... they're lucky. The don't apparently have villians that would go after their friends and family that way. I don't assume the same will be true for Spider-Mans rogue gallery. I suspect a big bullseye will be painted on a LOT of people in Peter's life now... maybe I'm wrong, we'll see.

[Bobster777]

Here's the thing... agreeing with the registration did not mean he had to publically reveal his identity in front of the press. I don't think if he registered but continued to keep his identity a secret to the public Maria Hill would make an example of him.

As for the FF... they're lucky. The don't apparently have villians that would go after their friends and family that way. I don't assume the same will be true for Spider-Mans rogue gallery. I suspect a big bullseye will be painted on a LOT of people in Peter's life now... maybe I'm wrong, we'll see.

The thing with the revealing is, Tony gave Peter two choices. Either go with him all the way (meaning unmasking) or go on the lam. I'm thinking Tony wanted to make Peter the poster boy for the registration act that the unmasking.

So many heroes have public identities. They all have to live with the threat of having their loved ones hurt by villains. All federal agents have to live with this threat as well. These heroes aren't being selfish in being heroes and putting their loved ones at risk. It's just that, they're not going let that risk stop them from helping other people and stopping villains. It's not logical to live in constant fear like that. In that case, no one would want to be a super hero.

[XPac]

The thing with the revealing is, Tony gave Peter two choices. Either go with him all the way (meaning unmasking) or go on the lam. I'm thinking Tony wanted to make Peter the poster boy for the registration act that the unmasking.

So many heroes have public identities. They all have to live with the threat of having their loved ones hurt by villains. All federal agents have to live with this threat as well. These heroes aren't being selfish in being heroes and putting their loved ones at risk. It's just that, they're not going let that risk stop them from helping other people and stopping villains. It's not logical to live in constant fear like that. In that case, no one would want to be a super hero.

Again, why did he have only 2 choices? Signing the registration without going on TV and unmasking yourself seems like a viable option enough to me. He didn't legally have to do any of that.

And yes, many heroes do have public identities (though many federal agents keep that aspect of their lives a secret). But how many of those same heroes sit in a classroom of children 6 hours a day? I don't recall them being given a vote as to whether or not they want a freaking Civil War dropped into their laps. And again, they don't get the luxury of living in a high tech fortress like MJ and Aunt May.

[Bobster777]

Again, why did he have only 2 choices? Signing the registration without going on TV and unmasking yourself seems like a viable option enough to me. He didn't legally have to do any of that.

And yes, many heroes do have public identities (though many federal agents keep that aspect of their lives a secret). But how many of those same heroes sit in a classroom of children 6 hours a day? I don't recall them being given a vote as to whether or not they want a freaking Civil War dropped into their laps. And again, they don't get the luxury of living in a high tech fortress like MJ and Aunt May.

Unmasking was the only choice Tony gave him though.

That's what makes the decision so hard. The whole Stamford thing just kind of forced this whole thing on them. Since the situation is there, they have no choice but to take a stand.

When the X-men were outed, there was a whole school of kids in danger. It still worked out in the end though (had it not been for the House of M situation). The teachers did just find protecting their kids. For sure, whereever Peter is teaching, there will be extra protection there.

My thoughts on the whole matter is this, if you are going to be a super hero, do you have the right to have a personal life? Yeah, you wear a mask, but all it takes is for one villain to capture you and unmask you then everyone in your life is in danger. Having a secret identity or not, everyone is in danger anyway if you are a hero.

[XPac]

Unmasking was the only choice Tony gave him though.

That's what makes the decision so hard. The whole Stamford thing just kind of forced this whole thing on them. Since the situation is there, they have no choice but to take a stand.

When the X-men were outed, there was a whole school of kids in danger. It still worked out in the end though (had it not been for the House of M situation). The teachers did just find protecting their kids. For sure, whereever Peter is teaching, there will be extra protection there.

My thoughts on the whole matter is this, if you are going to be a super hero, do you have the right to have a personal life? Yeah, you wear a mask, but all it takes is for one villain to capture you and unmask you then everyone in your life is in danger. Having a secret identity or not, everyone is in danger anyway if you are a hero.


Again, just Tony told him those were his choices doesn't mean that's actually the case. He DID have a choice NOT to publically reveal himself... and he's going to have to life with the fact that this was entirely HIS decision if the people he cares about become endangered because of it.

And you can't use the Xmen school as a comparrison. That's another high tech fortress, complete with both teachers and students who have super powers. The teachers at Peters school won't be able to shoot optic blasts at Rhyno if he decides to pay a visit like they can at Xaviers.

But hey, maybe I'm wrong and all the members of Spideys rogues gallery will be respectful enough NOT to target his friends, family, or his children at school. I'm just not as optimistic as that possibility as you seem to be (or as Peter seems to be).

Maybe there will be more security placed on Peter at his work purely for this reason, but again these are resources that are being used up because of the Registration that could be better utlized elsewhere if this whole thing wasn't happening to begin with. As I've said before, it really seems as though only the villians are benefiting from it.

[Bobster777]

Again, just Tony told him those were his choices doesn't mean that's actually the case. He DID have a choice NOT to publically reveal himself... and he's going to have to life with the fact that this was entirely HIS decision if the people he cares about become endangered because of it.

And you can't use the Xmen school as a comparrison. That's another high tech fortress, complete with both teachers and students who have super powers. The teachers at Peters school won't be able to shoot optic blasts at Rhyno if he decides to pay a visit like they can at Xaviers.

But hey, maybe I'm wrong and all the members of Spideys rogues gallery will be respectful enough NOT to target his friends, family, or his children at school. I'm just not as optimistic as that possibility as you seem to be (or as Peter seems to be).

Maybe there will be more security placed on Peter at his work purely for this reason, but again these are resources that are being used up because of the Registration that could be better utlized elsewhere if this whole thing wasn't happening to begin with. As I've said before, it really seems as though only the villians are benefiting from it.

The villains probably are, but only time will tell though.

About the Tony thing though, Tony only offered his protection if Peter would go all the way (meaning unmasking). I don't think Peter trusted giving his identity over to the gov without having Tony's protection. That's why he felt he only had two choices.

[XPac]

The villains probably are, but only time will tell though.

About the Tony thing though, Tony only offered his protection if Peter would go all the way (meaning unmasking). I don't think Peter trusted giving his identity over to the gov without having Tony's protection. That's why he felt he only had two choices.

So Tony ONLY offered Peter's family protection if he agreed to unmask? Well, if people are wondering why Tony seems more like the badguy than Caps side, this is it. It's behavior like this.

If Peter does turn on Tony, then right or wrong I think Tony asked for it by dealing with people in this manner.

[Bobster777]

So Tony ONLY offered Peter's family protection if he agreed to unmask? Well, if people are wondering why Tony seems more like the badguy than Caps side, this is it. It's behavior like this.

If Peter does turn on Tony, then right or wrong I think Tony asked for it by dealing with people in this manner.

I still think Tony's mind is all warped because of the whole Extremis thing. Plus, being a billionaire, he has got to be a "do it my way or the highway" type of guy.

[agrich]

Parker's an adult, he made his own decision, no matter how much he was pressured or whatever. He certainly could have told Tony to just go to hell and tried to figure something out on his own. Reading the scene in Civil War 2, he doesn't act like the decision was forced out of him - he acts like he believes it's the right thing to do.

As for his teaching career, I give him enough credit for knowing that unmasking might have brought that life to an end. I mean, he's not going to make money selling pictures of Spider-Man to the Daily Bugle anymore, either.

[hcblankscreen]

Well wasn't part of the registration deal getting payed? Unless I read something wrong they're going to be "employees", so I think he'll be fine without that massive teaching salary.

[Bobster777]

Parker's an adult, he made his own decision, no matter how much he was pressured or whatever. He certainly could have told Tony to just go to hell and tried to figure something out on his own. Reading the scene in Civil War 2, he doesn't act like the decision was forced out of him - he acts like he believes it's the right thing to do.

As for his teaching career, I give him enough credit for knowing that unmasking might have brought that life to an end. I mean, he's not going to make money selling pictures of Spider-Man to the Daily Bugle anymore, either.

Yeah, I know Peter is an adult. However, it still doesn't excuse Tony. Peter made his decision in large part because of Tony's influence. As we all know, Tony's been doing a lot of shady stuff, like hiring titanium man. So, Peter didn't have the whole picture when he made the decision which kind of makes Tony a bit of a bastard.

[xmixmasterx]

What's unfair about it? A fair and balanced take on a totalitarian society still isn't going to cover up the disgusting practises of that society. If you're on the pro-registration side, just accept the fact that pro-registration are now the bad guys teaming up with the other bad guys to imprison the good guys. It wouldn't make sense any other way, in the book or the real world.

[Bobster777]

What's unfair about it? A fair and balanced take on a totalitarian society still isn't going to cover up the disgusting practises of that society. If you're on the pro-registration side, just accept the fact that pro-registration are now the bad guys teaming up with the other bad guys to imprison the good guys. It wouldn't make sense any other way, in the book or the real world.

That's the thing though. Pro-registration aren't bad guys at all. They're just trying to do what the majority of the citizens want. Why have laws if people aren't going to abide by them?

[agrich]

Yeah, I know Peter is an adult. However, it still doesn't excuse Tony. Peter made his decision in large part because of Tony's influence. As we all know, Tony's been doing a lot of shady stuff, like hiring titanium man. So, Peter didn't have the whole picture when he made the decision which kind of makes Tony a bit of a bastard.

Hey, I wouldn't try to excuse Tony. I'm anti-registration. I think Tony and everyone on his side is fighting the wrong battle. I'm just saying that Peter is making his own decisions here, so I'm not going to blame anyone else for the potentially negative consequences.

That's the thing though. Pro-registration aren't bad guys at all. They're just trying to do what the majority of the citizens want. Why have laws if people aren't going to abide by them?

Well, there have been points in time when the majority of New Yorkers thought Spider-man was a murderer, and police would fire on him when he showed up at a crime scene. Sometimes the majority is later proven to be wrong. Do you agree with everything our government does? I mean, just because 6 out of 10 people think we should go to war somewhere doesn't mean everyone else should support it...does it? In a free country the minority viewpoint is both allowed to hold their opinion and speak out about it.

I know, I know, registration is The Law and people who don't support it are breaking the law. But lots of things have been laws throughout history which were either later overturned/repealed or -- at some point -- shown to be bad laws. Maybe that's how this thing will turn out too.

[Bobster777]

Hey, I wouldn't try to excuse Tony. I'm anti-registration. I think Tony and everyone on his side is fighting the wrong battle. I'm just saying that Peter is making his own decisions here, so I'm not going to blame anyone else for the potentially negative consequences.

Yeah, I agree with you there. Since we have free will, we're all responsible for the choices we make. I just can't get over the fact that had Peter known what really was going on, he may have not made the same decision.