Why is Cap so anti-reg?

[jackolover]

Excuse the preamble but it leads into the jist.

I am not convinced the missing years of Captain America have been explained. MK Cap 'Ice' tried to explain cap was ambushed and the Gov. attempted to snuff him, but gave up and put cap on ice for storage? Why? Because they didn't have the heart to cremate him? I'm not sure if the movie or picture evidence in that storyline was real or contrived, like Hana suggested - you have to read this storyline.

So, here it is - now certainly the above explains cap's new distrust with any government SHRA laws. Distrust goes both ways. Civilians may distrust capes, but capes also distrust the government.

(And another thing. I think this winter soldier is that little Russian orphan, General Lucas led away in MK cap, not the real Bucky, but we'll only know from DNA comparison).

Anyway, I think the CW storyline was concocted before, and spread to, Cap MK 7 - 17, and Cap/Falcon 1 - 6 storylines. Cap trusted Shield because he was an agent, but he didn't trust government. Falcon went rogue during the Cap/Falcon storyline. Also, remember when there was that story, cap wakes up on a Nazi sub, taken to king Red Skull, and cap jumps out of the window? So CW #1.

[Grazzt]

Personally, I think the only reason he's as anti-reg as he is, is because of how SHIELD attacked him so quickly in Civil War #1. I think that if they hadn't reacted as severely as they did, Cap would have fought the new law in a legal manner, if at all.

[Effect]

I think it's pretty much that. Hill caused this whole anti-reg stance when she attacked Cap the way she did. Especailly when the SHRA wasn't even law at the time, she was completely in the wrong. I guess it's to much to hope that we get a bit of reflection from Hill on that situation and her thinking about how all her problems with Cap and his group are basicly her fault.

[jackolover]

Personally, I think the only reason he's as anti-reg as he is, is because of how SHIELD attacked him so quickly in Civil War #1. I think that if they hadn't reacted as severely as they did, Cap would have fought the new law in a legal manner, if at all.

Yeah, I agree. Cap would have had no real reason to go renegade, if Shield hadn't tried to push it. I also think that Shield attacking him like that, freaked him out. As though the government were again trying to take him out, like 1945. That would send anybody anti, but cap, with his nightmares of having the gov dispose of him in the past, more so.

And the whole fighting the SHRA law legally, could have been done too. Why confront these guys. My god! They have powers that can really hurt you. And you get Cap on the wrong side, and watch out. They are liable to have a revolution. Didn't they ever think of this, Hill and Stark? But Millar wouldn't have the drama that CW is, would he.

[jackolover]

I think it's pretty much that. Hill caused this whole anti-reg stance when she attacked Cap the way she did. Especailly when the SHRA wasn't even law at the time, she was completely in the wrong. I guess it's to much to hope that we get a bit of reflection from Hill on that situation and her thinking about how all her problems with Cap and his group are basicly her fault.

So right. My god, the woman shoots first and asks later. How dumb is that? How did she get that job? If you had smart people in authority, CW may not have happened so brutally.

[IamtheRock3]

Way I see it

1) Cap old school. He trust the capes and this the way they did buisness for long, it works

2) He doesnt want the goverment telling Him Who the bad guys are. That a VERY important statment. People say Ignore New Avenger and foucus..but hey thing written by one of the manner front runners of this thing..so cant ignore it. Heroes all have to work under shield. They all ready showed they may have thier priotires mixed up, hutning down A guy who stop a mugger when thier villans out there.

Cap has the understand of Goverment burecracy and Bullshit. He know it may come a time, that the goverment may want the heroes to take down a Guy because it fits the BOTTOM line and not because he a threat. Or for some other politcal reason other then..this villan a danger. It not OUT THERE. That would happen. Hell garbage like that is true in a real world. A Dictator can be consider a Allie..and then can be consider EVIL the next year, when said Dictaor been behaving just as bad as they always behave.

3) Shield being crooked, doesnt trust the goverment as much as he use to

4) Hill and Crew attackin Cap wasnt just a jerky move, but a sign of How Shield may opperate when they have the heroes other their command. There using VILLANS to hunt heroes down. I am SUUUURRRRRE that not going to blow up in ANYONE face...surrrrrrrrre

5) The heroes going by it legaly. Your saw how the LAW working for speedball..very fair and very just..not. No way the Young guns would of got fair trials. Their butts be tossed in some cage.

6) And note mostly the pro side been hunting them, not the other way around. Most of there attack was avoiding Jail or breaking other out of Jail After shiled attack and arrest thier people. But they haven't been setting out to fight Iron man, or setting a Trap for Sheild

People say Cap was a Jerk to Iron man. But Iron man attack thier guys, Had them sorrouned by Arm soldier, And robots called CAPE KILLERS, and then Iron man was like "Lets talk buddy, it all cool"

It was basicly do what I say or get arrested. Cap couldnt said

"I respectly Disagree Tony...so I am going to walk out of here. Call it a day"

Wasnt an option



Did Cap overeact throug ARc..yes. Both sides did.

But he does have his reasons

[mr_evilweed]

Cap's so anti-reg cus he wants to beat the bleeding crap out of Iron man.:evilsmile :evilsmile

[Kaos]

doesn't everbody, evilweed? doesn't everybody?

[Markavian]

Way I see it

1) Cap old school. He trust the capes and this the way they did buisness for long, it works

2) He doesnt want the goverment telling Him Who the bad guys are. That a VERY important statment. People say Ignore New Avenger and foucus..but hey thing written by one of the manner front runners of this thing..so cant ignore it. Heroes all have to work under shield. They all ready showed they may have thier priotires mixed up, hutning down A guy who stop a mugger when thier villans out there.

Cap has the understand of Goverment burecracy and Bullshit. He know it may come a time, that the goverment may want the heroes to take down a Guy because it fits the BOTTOM line and not because he a threat. Or for some other politcal reason other then..this villan a danger. It not OUT THERE. That would happen. Hell garbage like that is true in a real world. A Dictator can be consider a Allie..and then can be consider EVIL the next year, when said Dictaor been behaving just as bad as they always behave.

3) Shield being crooked, doesnt trust the goverment as much as he use to

4) Hill and Crew attackin Cap wasnt just a jerky move, but a sign of How Shield may opperate when they have the heroes other their command. There using VILLANS to hunt heroes down. I am SUUUURRRRRE that not going to blow up in ANYONE face...surrrrrrrrre

5) The heroes going by it legaly. Your saw how the LAW working for speedball..very fair and very just..not. No way the Young guns would of got fair trials. Their butts be tossed in some cage.

6) And note mostly the pro side been hunting them, not the other way around. Most of there attack was avoiding Jail or breaking other out of Jail After shiled attack and arrest thier people. But they haven't been setting out to fight Iron man, or setting a Trap for Sheild

People say Cap was a Jerk to Iron man. But Iron man attack thier guys, Had them sorrouned by Arm soldier, And robots called CAPE KILLERS, and then Iron man was like "Lets talk buddy, it all cool"

It was basicly do what I say or get arrested. Cap couldnt said

"I respectly Disagree Tony...so I am going to walk out of here. Call it a day"

Wasnt an option



Did Cap overeact throug ARc..yes. Both sides did.

But he does have his reasons The Single Biggest Mistake in CW so far Was The Way the New Warriors went in after the Villans The Second was the Way Hill Attacked Cap like he was A SuicidE Bomber trying to enter the White House ..TOTALLY out of Line and made CW happen. Third Mistakes was Caps. Attack the SHEILD Convoy with the Young Avengers on it.I for the Life of me cant under5stand WHY Cap didnt go to Iron Man and the Other Avengers after he was attacked..The Avengers always stuck together in such matters.. Cap went Rouge as a matter of choice..There were a top of options open to him. Cintact the Avengers ,Contact the President in a Open Broadcast Video that would have made the Public Question the Wisdom of the Way SHRA was starting to be handled. And More than a Few of the Pro Reg heroes mighyt have backed Cap up.Also things ARENT being handled by Capes Right, 600+ dead in Stamford 26 dead in Vegas from the Hulks Rampage..Something has to be done differently.. Lawsuits could have been filed sympathetic members of congress consulted Etc. But of course if things had been handled Logicly we wouldnt have this Wonderful MU Event to enjoy :cool:

[DonkeyKFCMuffy]

Everyone thinks that Captain America is a U.S. Government follower, a super-soldier, who follows orders from the gornverment without second thought. This made me think that Captain America would have sides with the government and been pro-reg but really what Captain America is suppossed to stand for is America. America as in the people and freedom. He is siding with freedom, the freedom to keep your identity to yourself. I expected Cap to side with the reg at first because he had nothing to lose, and always seemes like a hero who was very loyal to his superiors (US government)instead he just showed me that he stands for freedom of the people.

[IamtheRock3]

yea always said I I was Cap

I LET myself be arrest in front of congress after giving one of those KICK BUTT cap speeches

And trust me they wont be pulling a Speedball on cap where he just tossed in a Hole somewhere. They would actully have to it by the full legal book


Who will the public back after that

A X gunning running drunk, a Wife beater...or CAPTAIN FREAKEN AMERICA

You make the call

[jackolover]

The Single Biggest Mistake in CW so far Was The Way the New Warriors went in after the Villans The Second was the Way Hill Attacked Cap like he was A SuicidE Bomber trying to enter the White House ..TOTALLY out of Line and made CW happen. Third Mistakes was Caps. Attack the SHEILD Convoy with the Young Avengers on it.I for the Life of me cant under5stand WHY Cap didnt go to Iron Man and the Other Avengers after he was attacked..The Avengers always stuck together in such matters.. Cap went Rouge as a matter of choice..There were a top of options open to him. Cintact the Avengers ,Contact the President in a Open Broadcast Video that would have made the Public Question the Wisdom of the Way SHRA was starting to be handled. And More than a Few of the Pro Reg heroes mighyt have backed Cap up.Also things ARENT being handled by Capes Right, 600+ dead in Stamford 26 dead in Vegas from the Hulks Rampage..Something has to be done differently.. Lawsuits could have been filed sympathetic members of congress consulted Etc. But of course if things had been handled Logicly we wouldnt have this Wonderful MU Event to enjoy :cool:


I so like how you're thinking. Cap should have gone to the Avengers. What would Iron Man have done? Attack him? I don't think so. Like you say, the Avengers stick together. I don't know why Cap decided he had no more friends. A bit of psychology to think of there.

[jackolover]

Cap's so anti-reg cus he wants to beat the bleeding crap out of Iron man.:evilsmile :evilsmile

I am not sure where you are coming from here. Do you see Cap and Iron Man NOT being friends, before CW? And that's why cap wants to beat the living daylight out of Tony?

[Nick Kal]

It's convenient for the story.

[Doom Hammer]

I don't think Cap would rebel if SHIELD and the proponents of the SHRA had their stuff together, but it's all murky and questionable.

[Red Lotus]

I think its a joke to say Cap is Anti because of what Hill did. Its almost a slap in the face to who Cap is. Thats almost like saying Cap is mad at Hill so he is Anti to get even at her and SHIELD. How many times has Fury and SHIELD mind wipe Cap and Cap still worked with them.

If Hill didn't do that do you really think Cap would hunt down his friends or good people for a law he thinks is wrong. I dont, I think Cap would still have went under ground and Civil War would still have happen. Cap sees the law as some thing that will get in the way of helping people.

As for Hill. She was in the wrong. There are no laws that say Law Enforcement Offcers have the right to detain some one for at most 48 hours before charging them with a crime. What was she thinking? No mater how morally wrong Hill was that law just doesn’t exist, so she had no legal right to detain Cap and . . . . .Oh wait never mind.:rolleyes:

[jackolover]

Way I see it

1) Cap old school. He trust the capes and this the way they did buisness for long, it works

2) He doesnt want the goverment telling Him Who the bad guys are. That a VERY important statment. People say Ignore New Avenger and foucus..but hey thing written by one of the manner front runners of this thing..so cant ignore it. Heroes all have to work under shield. They all ready showed they may have thier priotires mixed up, hutning down A guy who stop a mugger when thier villans out there.

Cap has the understand of Goverment burecracy and Bullshit. He know it may come a time, that the goverment may want the heroes to take down a Guy because it fits the BOTTOM line and not because he a threat. Or for some other politcal reason other then..this villan a danger. It not OUT THERE. That would happen. Hell garbage like that is true in a real world. A Dictator can be consider a Allie..and then can be consider EVIL the next year, when said Dictaor been behaving just as bad as they always behave.

3) Shield being crooked, doesnt trust the goverment as much as he use to

4) Hill and Crew attackin Cap wasnt just a jerky move, but a sign of How Shield may opperate when they have the heroes other their command. There using VILLANS to hunt heroes down. I am SUUUURRRRRE that not going to blow up in ANYONE face...surrrrrrrrre

5) The heroes going by it legaly. Your saw how the LAW working for speedball..very fair and very just..not. No way the Young guns would of got fair trials. Their butts be tossed in some cage.

6) And note mostly the pro side been hunting them, not the other way around. Most of there attack was avoiding Jail or breaking other out of Jail After shiled attack and arrest thier people. But they haven't been setting out to fight Iron man, or setting a Trap for Sheild

People say Cap was a Jerk to Iron man. But Iron man attack thier guys, Had them sorrouned by Arm soldier, And robots called CAPE KILLERS, and then Iron man was like "Lets talk buddy, it all cool"

It was basicly do what I say or get arrested. Cap couldnt said

"I respectly Disagree Tony...so I am going to walk out of here. Call it a day"

Wasnt an option



Did Cap overeact throug ARc..yes. Both sides did.

But he does have his reasons

Wow, Iamtherock3. You really got started.

1. Cap is old school, but Stark and Richards have been around and also trust capes? Why don't they have confidence in the Capes? Cap seems to be overlooking the downside when jobs go wrong.

2. Yeah, the bad guys thing. But avoiding muggers to take down good capes may be neccessary to reduce your opponents. Not sure whether you're saying Ignore the New Avengers, or if you're saying Stark part-wrote the SHRA?

Hmm. Interesting point that cap would have contingencies for when the gov tries to interfier with capes. I like that. Very Saddam Hussien-like policy.

3. Amen.

4. Maybe Shield will use crims. (Yeah. Already Osborn is on the loose)

5. Very sceptical about justice for the capes, now isn't it. This whole thing with attacking the dissenters really explodes in the gov faces. Too damn stupid for words.

6. Okay, cap is not running a vendetta here. Makes him seem an idealist. He is taking the high ground. I wonder if somehow the authorities will take him down a peg or 2.

Yeah, cap couldn't negotiate from a place of vulnerability. Sad but true.

[jackolover]

I think its a joke to say Cap is Anti because of what Hill did. Its almost a slap in the face to who Cap is. Thats almost like saying Cap is mad at Hill so he is Anti to get even at her and SHIELD. How many times has Fury and SHIELD mind wipe Cap and Cap still worked with them.

If Hill didn't do that do you really think Cap would hunt down his friends or good people for a law he thinks is wrong. I dont, I think Cap would still have went under ground and Civil War would still have happen. Cap sees the law as some thing that will get in the way of helping people.

As for Hill. She was in the wrong. There are no laws that say Law Enforcement Offcers have the right to detain some one for at most 48 hours before charging them with a crime. What was she thinking? No mater how morally wrong Hill was that law just doesn’t exist, so she had no legal right to detain Cap and . . . . .Oh wait never mind.:rolleyes:

Yeah, I got to say, the Hill attack couldn't have set cap on the road to anti-reg. He was already that way disposed. It was the finality of the attack. Cap realised negotiation was not what the gov was going to use. BAM! Hit em hard.

[IamtheRock3]

I think its a joke to say Cap is Anti because of what Hill did. Its almost a slap in the face to who Cap is. Thats almost like saying Cap is mad at Hill so he is Anti to get even at her and SHIELD. How many times has Fury and SHIELD mind wipe Cap and Cap still worked with them.

If Hill didn't do that do you really think Cap would hunt down his friends or good people for a law he thinks is wrong. I dont, I think Cap would still have went under ground and Civil War would still have happen. Cap sees the law as some thing that will get in the way of helping people.

As for Hill. She was in the wrong. There are no laws that say Law Enforcement Offcers have the right to detain some one for at most 48 hours before charging them with a crime. What was she thinking? No mater how morally wrong Hill was that law just doesn’t exist, so she had no legal right to detain Cap and . . . . .Oh wait never mind.:rolleyes:


You still got to explain some basis for arrest them
Have to be A Witness, Or a SUSPECT TO THE CRIME, You got file the papers and explain your your superioes. If those Paper dont match, trust me said Cop it deep S.

For instance If a Cop said

Cop- holding this guy for 48 hours

Superior- Why

Cop- $%it and giggles

Superior- Your fired, turn in your badge.

Cop- Well the guy did PISS me off. So of course I put guns on the person. I mean they were Tranq darts. I mean he still be alive, he just be pooping his pants for a week or 2

Superior- Seriously clean out your desk.

So you clearly NEED a VERY SOLID reason that has something to do with breakign the crime or being connected to it someway.

You can arrest a person simply for not working with you. A Cop can't say "Hey Doing nieghboorhood watch thing, can you join"

Me "No think that a stupit idea"

Cop "Find your under Arrest"

me "Wait WHAT!!"

Cop- "Hey you only can bitch when you in there for 48 hours and 1 second. ANY LESS..shut your hole hippie"

Cops need some basis to arrest someone. They can't grab them up for NO REASON.

The law hadn't been pass, and cap had guns pointed at them

"First hat be Accesive force for one thing"

The like pulling out a gun for a Parking violation

Sure you can come up with some Bs to expalin why needed to hold him. But the fact you NEED to come up with BS shows that stuff isnt legal

[IamtheRock3]

Oh Jacklover

To answer Your Questin

The refrence to new Avengers is some people said The Registration Act Said nothing about Shield running things

New Avenger did, but it mention nothing in the main mini series. New Avenger may be a writer going overzelous some say

But for me cant ignore it. Benside one of the main writers of Marvel. New Avenge a Tie in, Tie ins take a while to do...So The Editor of marvel AWARE of The new Avenger storyline (least I like to THINK he is being an editor and all)

So can't just ignore it.

Got to accept everything they give me that has CIVAL WAR logo

[jackolover]

Oh Jacklover

To answer Your Questin

The refrence to new Avengers is some people said The Registration Act Said nothing about Shield running things

New Avenger did, but it mention nothing in the main mini series. New Avenger may be a writer going overzelous some say

But for me cant ignore it. Benside one of the main writers of Marvel. New Avenge a Tie in, Tie ins take a while to do...So The Editor of marvel AWARE of The new Avenger storyline (least I like to THINK he is being an editor and all)

So can't just ignore it.

Got to accept everything they give me that has CIVAL WAR logo

Oh, I get it. It was Bendis who said, in New Avengers, that Shield was to run things in the SHRA, and people are saying to ignore it. Thanks for clearing that up.

[Starscream]

i think the reason why Cap went underground and is actively fighting the Pro side is due to the fact (like many others said) that SHIELD attacked him so quickly after he said no to them asking him to hunt down Anti guys.

the other reason is i think cause hes a boy from the 30s and 40s he is one of those heroes thats close ot the people.
I think he fears that if all Heros register with SHIELD theyd be used as soldiers and so on to hunt down big threats etc and would no longer be allowed to be close ot the streets and help the people directly.

the last reason being that SHIELD simply wont take a no.
Like you HAVE to register and HAVE to work for SHIELD no middle line (atleast thats how the Pro side brings it when they force others to register)

Cap is one of them old skool guys that believes in freedom etc.
plus putting the Captain America as an Anti brings a nice ring to it all.
If Captain would be pro it would be a lil to predictable, having the american flag fight the law is more revolution.
btw i doubt Iron Man (if he were anti) could bring so many people to side with him.

[jackolover]

i think the reason why Cap went underground and is actively fighting the Pro side is due to the fact (like many others said) that SHIELD attacked him so quickly after he said no to them asking him to hunt down Anti guys.

the other reason is i think cause hes a boy from the 30s and 40s he is one of those heroes thats close ot the people.
I think he fears that if all Heros register with SHIELD theyd be used as soldiers and so on to hunt down big threats etc and would no longer be allowed to be close ot the streets and help the people directly.

the last reason being that SHIELD simply wont take a no.
Like you HAVE to register and HAVE to work for SHIELD no middle line (atleast thats how the Pro side brings it when they force others to register)

Cap is one of them old skool guys that believes in freedom etc.
plus putting the Captain America as an Anti brings a nice ring to it all.
If Captain would be pro it would be a lil to predictable, having the american flag fight the law is more revolution.
btw i doubt Iron Man (if he were anti) could bring so many people to side with him.

Side with IM if he was anti? Pretty sure there would be no takers. Stark doesn't have the integrity, being part of the establishment. Cap is a loner, a grass roots hero, with integrity to spare. No wonder the scared anti-side follows him.

[Markavian]

I so like how you're thinking. Cap should have gone to the Avengers. What would Iron Man have done? Attack him? I don't think so. Like you say, the Avengers stick together. I don't know why Cap decided he had no more friends. A bit of psychology to think of there.
I Can See Captain America reminiscing "Why Didnt I go to my fellow Avengers after Hill Ordered Sheild to Jump me? " As He watches Moonrise over a Frozen Canadian lake from Department H's HQ late at night........:(

[Starscream]

I Can See Captain America reminiscing "Why Didnt I go to my fellow Avengers after Hill Ordered Sheild to Jump me? " As He watches Moonrise over a Frozen Canadian lake from Department H's HQ late at night........:(


i think he didnt go to the avengers cause either he thought Stark was already to far Pro or he did go to Iron Man to talka bout this and IM atm is faking to be pro.

[jackolover]

i think he didnt go to the avengers cause either he thought Stark was already to far Pro or he did go to Iron Man to talka bout this and IM atm is faking to be pro.

Starscream, I can't quite get the last part, where cap did go to IM, but then you lost me. Can you please explain?

[Starscream]

Starscream, I can't quite get the last part, where cap did go to IM, but then you lost me. Can you please explain?

after Cap got jumped by SHIELD he immediatly went underground.

maybe we werent shown everything.
its a big maybe but MAYBE Cap did contact IM after he got jumped.
And the 2 of them decided that IM would stay Pro to get more info out of SHIELD or whatever.

Because Cap not talking to IM or the Avengers after being jumped by SHIELD is a little to unbelievable.

[misterorange]

I guess its because what he believes in. I dont think it would have made a difference if he was attacked or not in the begining. The way Tony and Reed are going about it would have aggrivated the crap out of Cap espically the 42.

[jackolover]

after Cap got jumped by SHIELD he immediatly went underground.

maybe we werent shown everything.
its a big maybe but MAYBE Cap did contact IM after he got jumped.
And the 2 of them decided that IM would stay Pro to get more info out of SHIELD or whatever.

Because Cap not talking to IM or the Avengers after being jumped by SHIELD is a little to unbelievable.

Yeah, but with cap getting the crap kicked out of him by IM in CW3, doesn't seem like they are in cahoots to me. Maybe Cap and IM's rivalry is all just a ruse, and in the end, they compare notes, to sucker the SHRA, and take out Shield for good. Because Shield has been Starks baby, right from the start, in 1965. Maybe Stark thinks Shield has run it's course.

[OdinSon1]

Have we all forgotten that Cap hasn't been the government's boy for a long time?

When the government gave him the option of either taking orders from them, or give up being Captain America, he turned the suit in and took the alias the Captain, because the government was going to try to make him their lapdog, and thats not what Cap is about. Cap is a symbol of American the most important American ideal, freedom.

Or how about when Captain America got exiled from America, and again had to take a new costume and was globe trotting with Sharon Carter. The government could have went into making sure Cap was the man they were after, but they didn't, the President exiled him.

And lastly, lets examine Tony Stark. Tony is a cutthroat business man whose been in compliance with the government for years. Tony is a man who isn't above selling out, as its a part of his every day life. Would Cap, knowing the guy for as many years as he has, turn to the corporate sell-out for help against the government? Of course not, he's not going to let Tony in on his moves so he can get ratted out.

It made perfect sense that Cap is anti-registration, because he's refused to become the government's lapdog for years, why would he suddenly change?

[Jeff-E]

This is one of the reason's I'm pro-reg. We don't know why these hero's are against the law, we all make assumptions on why they are against it but in the end we have no real idea. They never say, they just blatently defy the law and the current will of the people. There is no real reason to be anti-reg as far as I can see, and if those against it would change their tune and join up they could probably set in motion a force to police those who get access to the names of hero's. In essence they could effect more productive, and more effiecent change on Tony's side than on Cap's side.

[Markavian]

This is one of the reason's I'm pro-reg. We don't know why these hero's are against the law, we all make assumptions on why they are against it but in the end we have no real idea. They never say, they just blatently defy the law and the current will of the people. There is no real reason to be anti-reg as far as I can see, and if those against it would change their tune and join up they could probably set in motion a force to police those who get access to the names of hero's. In essence they could effect more productive, and more effiecent change on Tony's side than on Cap's side.
The New World Order or some kind of Whacko non existent Group will get ahold of their Names and try to control them.Marvel said there is no Mastermind behind CW but we all know Marvel has lied before. But I truely dont think there is a Mastermind just a Cluster **** of Events several mistakes made by several people made this Snowball into CW.The Anti Heros have been reading David Ickes And John Tribor Time Travelers Web sites too much I would say 8-)

[Starscream]

The New World Order or some kind of Whacko non existent Group will get ahold of their Names and try to control them.Marvel said their is no Mastermind behind CW but we all know Marvel has lied before. But I truely dont think there is a Mastermind just a Cluster **** of Events several mistakes made by several people made this Snowball into CW.The Anti Heros have been reafing David Ickes And John Tribor Time Travelers Web sites too much I would say 8-)

dito.
i also think there aint a real mastermind behind it all.
But that alot of criminal organisations and bad guys were planning stuff for a long time but were only waiting for the right moment.
And Decimation and This Super Hero registration act are the 2 things theyve been waiting for as now is thebest moment for them to do their thing.

Abd yeah Captain America fights for no goverment he fights for the people.
thats what they tought him in the 30s/40s its what they told him when he went to WW2 and it is what he stil believes and its a good thing.


And what is aid about me thinking IM is faking it and is stil with Cap is a thing i personally hope for.

[APEX]

Caps not crazy, he was pushed into this from the beginning.

What If you were a good skateboarder and just did it in you spare time for fun. Then all of a sudden they said at midnight all skateboard must join us, you'll get a pay check for you trouble. And all skateboarders can join up with when we see fit. Would would want that, not me i like my freedom.

Why should you have to pick Iron man and the government or jail. I'll take jail over slavery.

[Markavian]

Caps not crazy, he was pushed into this from the beginning.

What If you were a good skateboarder and just did it in you spare time for fun. Then all of a sudden they said at midnight all skateboard must join us, you'll get a pay check for you trouble. And all skateboarders can join up with when we see fit. Would would want that, not me i like my freedom.

Why should you have to pick Iron man and the government or jail. I'll take jail over slavery.
It isnt a game or a Sport like Skateboarding. Thats what Started Civil War By The New Warriors treating it as a Game by being Reckless. Had the more experienced members of the Warriors been there (Nova Justice Firestar Even Rage!! )the outcome in Stamford would have had a different Ending. but they were not so we had some third stringer heroes who screwed up big time and caused CW in the first place.:mad:

[Violently Apathetic]

This is one of the reason's I'm pro-reg. We don't know why these hero's are against the law, we all make assumptions on why they are against it but in the end we have no real idea. They never say, they just blatently defy the law and the current will of the people. There is no real reason to be anti-reg as far as I can see, and if those against it would change their tune and join up they could probably set in motion a force to police those who get access to the names of hero's. In essence they could effect more productive, and more effiecent change on Tony's side than on Cap's side.

To be fair, we are equally in the dark about SHIELD's handling of the situation as well. Again, I may even be Pro-Reg if they'd just remove SHIELD from the equation entirely, but the truth is they are using a shadow organization that is rarely subject to civilian oversight as their base of operations. Considering SHIELD's history that is not something that should fill the average MU character with confidence. SHIELD knowingly keeps its heroes and the people of the MU in the dark, Cap has simply lacked the chance to explain himself. Frankly anyone who trusts SHIELD to behave itself is already ignoring the steps it is taking to ensure it comes out on top, putting its goals ahead of reason and the general safety of the public.

The Pro-Reg side has a very strong argument, but the shortsighted and even STUPID way they've gone about it has killed any support I may have had for the issue.

[Jmacq1]

To be fair, we are equally in the dark about SHIELD's handling of the situation as well. Again, I may even be Pro-Reg if they'd just remove SHIELD from the equation entirely, but the truth is they are using a shadow organization that is rarely subject to civilian oversight as their base of operations. Considering SHIELD's history that is not something that should fill the average MU character with confidence. SHIELD knowingly keeps its heroes and the people of the MU in the dark, Cap has simply lacked the chance to explain himself. Frankly anyone who trusts SHIELD to behave itself is already ignoring the steps it is taking to ensure it comes out on top, putting its goals ahead of reason and the general safety of the public.

The Pro-Reg side has a very strong argument, but the shortsighted and even STUPID way they've gone about it has killed any support I may have had for the issue.

QFT

I love how so many of the Pro-reg folks love to completely ignore just about -all- of the instances of SHIELD being corrupted, or the US government bungling metahuman affairs almost every single time they get involved with them. "Clearly history will never repeat itself/there's no proof that they're corrupt right -now-/blah blah blah".

I'm firmly Anti-Reg, but I'll freely admit that the Pro-Reg side does have very valid points. I have no problem with superheroes being accountable for their actions. Or with superheroes getting paid for their efforts. But I would -not- trust SHIELD to handle the matter. How would -you- feel if someone told you that, for instance, a shadowy paramilitary espionage agency that doesn't really have much civilian oversight is now going to be in charge of the largest arsenal of WMDs in the world? And that these WMDs are going to be conscripted to help "law enforcement" in the US. Yeah, that just fills me with warm-fuzzies...NOT. Even if SHIELD isn't corrupt right -now- (which is highly debatable), it's only a matter of time before it happens again. I can just about give the government itself a pass, because governments -do- change, and unlike SHIELD, there's a system of checks and balances that at least in theory prevents one corrupt individual from getting -too- powerful.

On the other hand, I think it's asenine that the government is putting all of the blame on the -heroes- when it's the -villains- that tend to cause the majority of the destruction in the conflicts. Namorita didn't blow up and kill 600 people, Nitro did. Were the New Warriors' actions irresponsible? Yes, but the blatant disregard for human life was on -Nitro's- part, not theirs. Would the situation have played out any differently if the New Warriors had been carrying badges? Or if a SHIELD SWAT team had kicked down the door instead of the Warriors?

I doubt it. Hence my other great problem with "registration": It doesn't solve any of the real problems. It's a token gesture that's ultimately empty and punishes the ones that are trying to do the -right- thing as opposed to the real root of the problem: The supervillains. If Apocalypse decides he's going to take over NYC, and the newly-registered X-Men show up to fight him, and in the course of the battle Apocalypse decides to crash his mega-ship into Wall Street....now the X-Men have to be accountable for that? If Green Goblin drops Gwen Stacy off a bridge while Spider-Man is fighting him, and she's killed in the process, are they now going to let the next of kin sue Peter Parker for wrongful death? The "accountability" aspect, while logical and in certain cases a good idea, really only serves to make the heroes' jobs nigh-impossible to do. They can't always choose their battlefields (in fact the instances where they -do- are exceedingly rare), nor can they control the actions of their opponents. Yet now they seem to be getting told they have to do both things or they'll be in trouble with their SHIELD/Government superiors.

[Red Lotus]

You still got to explain some basis for arrest them
Have to be A Witness, Or a SUSPECT TO THE CRIME, You got file the papers and explain your your superioes. If those Paper dont match, trust me said Cop it deep S.

For instance If a Cop said

Cop- holding this guy for 48 hours

Superior- Why

Cop- $%it and giggles

Superior- Your fired, turn in your badge.

Cop- Well the guy did PISS me off. So of course I put guns on the person. I mean they were Tranq darts. I mean he still be alive, he just be pooping his pants for a week or 2

Superior- Seriously clean out your desk.

So you clearly NEED a VERY SOLID reason that has something to do with breakign the crime or being connected to it someway.

You can arrest a person simply for not working with you. A Cop can't say "Hey Doing nieghboorhood watch thing, can you join"

Me "No think that a stupit idea"

Cop "Find your under Arrest"

me "Wait WHAT!!"

Cop- "Hey you only can bitch when you in there for 48 hours and 1 second. ANY LESS..shut your hole hippie"

Cops need some basis to arrest someone. They can't grab them up for NO REASON.

The law hadn't been pass, and cap had guns pointed at them

"First hat be Accesive force for one thing"

The like pulling out a gun for a Parking violation

Sure you can come up with some Bs to expalin why needed to hold him. But the fact you NEED to come up with BS shows that stuff isnt legal

Right or wong they have the power to hold some one for up to 48 hours. If you have a good lawyer then chances or you will get out after your lawyer comes. But the police can detain anyone they want to. You can be standing by your car doing nothing and a cop tells you to move, you dont move and that cop can detain you and say failure to comply with Police officers.

Yeah SHIELD was in the wrong and it was BS the way they treated Cap. In the past SHIELD has used all type of strong armed tactics against heroes. From blackmail, kidnapping, threats and even mind wiping heroes memories and that was Nick Fury doing all that. But that doesn't change the fact that with Cap SHIELD did have a legal right to try to detain him.

[IamtheRock3]

Right or wong they have the power to hold some one for up to 48 hours. If you have a good lawyer then chances or you will get out after your lawyer comes. But the police can detain anyone they want to. You can be standing by your car doing nothing and a cop tells you to move, you dont move and that cop can detain you and say failure to comply with Police officers.

Yeah SHIELD was in the wrong and it was BS the way they treated Cap. In the past SHIELD has used all type of strong armed tactics against heroes. From blackmail, kidnapping, threats and even mind wiping heroes memories and that was Nick Fury doing all that. But that doesn't change the fact that with Cap SHIELD did have a legal right to try to detain him.


I am pretty sure your wrong

The cop cant hold a guy from 48 hour for standing there

Otherwise they would need ZERO explanation

Unless a Cop can Go to his superior and say "I am holding him for pure $hits and giggles" and not be penalize, and then your wrong

So unles you going to tell me that the case, I think there wrong. That not to say they cant FIND a reason to do it..but find it they must.

Being a cop requries CRAZY paperworkd

namely if your pulling out a piece on someone

[bulbasteve]

Are you sure that technically SHIELD doesn't just consider Cap to still be an angent of SHIELD? Wasn't he one in the past? If he was insubordinate they had every right to try and detain him.

[IamtheRock3]

Are you sure that technically SHIELD doesn't just consider Cap to still be an angent of SHIELD? Wasn't he one in the past? If he was insubordinate they had every right to try and detain him.


wasnt before

unless that been reconned punch

[shaunyc56]

Yeah, I got to say, the Hill attack couldn't have set cap on the road to anti-reg. He was already that way disposed. It was the finality of the attack. Cap realised negotiation was not what the gov was going to use. BAM! Hit em hard.


The Shield attack was basically Hill's way of saying, "You are going after your friends for us, whether you like it or not, whether you respect this law or not." Cap was anti from the gate, but I don't think he would have led a resistance, I think he would have just sat it out, being an active agent of sheild and an active dute soldier w/ the rank of a 2 star general he is already registered. But the attack said to Cap, oh crap, these guys aren't going to give ME a chance to even sit this out, what the hell are they going to do to my friends who don't register?

[bulbasteve]

wasnt before

unless that been reconned punch

Aha, knew I shouldn't trust marvels dumb wiki. Hmmm did Cap ever turn down any missiosn from Fury?

[StoneGold]

Seriously, anyone asking this question never read this, or the 18 issues that followed it.

http://image.milehighcomics.com/istore/images/fullsize/14462577792.332.GIF

[StoneGold]

Aha, knew I shouldn't trust marvels dumb wiki. Hmmm did Cap ever turn down any missiosn from Fury?
Yes, however that only means that Fury had a better working relationship with Cap than Hill, and gave him more slack. It doesn't necessarily mean that Cap has the ability to turn down a directive.

But really, the whole situation started when Cap raised his arm at Hill. With his shield attached to it. Which might seem like a fairly inoccuous act to us, but considering how many times the cops have shot a man going for his wallet and have it be considered justifiable, raising a known deadly weapon at the head of a paramilitary organization isn't the smartest move for keeping tempers down.

[StoneGold]

wasnt before

unless that been reconned punch
Or if you're wrong. Cap has been a freelance SHIELD op for damn near forever, with top security clearance. The question is exactly what does freelance op mean. There's not really a clear definition. Thing is, that works to Hill's advantage in the moral/legal area, in that just because Fury gave Cap a lot of slack, doesn't mean she is obligated to.

[Donald Stone]

But really, the whole situation started when Cap raised his arm at Hill. With his shield attached to it. Which might seem like a fairly inoccuous act to us, but considering how many times the cops have shot a man going for his wallet and have it be considered justifiable, raising a known deadly weapon at the head of a paramilitary organization isn't the smartest move for keeping tempers down.

...

That is the dumbest thing I've heard yet.

Cap pointing his finger at Hill was justification for her to order her men to open fire on him?

[Donald Stone]

This is one of the reason's I'm pro-reg. We don't know why these hero's are against the law, we all make assumptions on why they are against it but in the end we have no real idea. They never say, they just blatently defy the law and the current will of the people. There is no real reason to be anti-reg as far as I can see, and if those against it would change their tune and join up they could probably set in motion a force to police those who get access to the names of hero's. In essence they could effect more productive, and more effiecent change on Tony's side than on Cap's side.Really, cause I though Cap and Luke Cage have said fairly eloquently why they think the act is stupid.

[Gregg Helmberger]

Yes, however that only means that Fury had a better working relationship with Cap than Hill, and gave him more slack. It doesn't necessarily mean that Cap has the ability to turn down a directive.

But really, the whole situation started when Cap raised his arm at Hill. With his shield attached to it. Which might seem like a fairly inoccuous act to us, but considering how many times the cops have shot a man going for his wallet and have it be considered justifiable, raising a known deadly weapon at the head of a paramilitary organization isn't the smartest move for keeping tempers down.

Hrrm. I'm not sure that flies as the inciting event for Civil War...

[IamtheRock3]

Or if you're wrong. Cap has been a freelance SHIELD op for damn near forever, with top security clearance. The question is exactly what does freelance op mean. There's not really a clear definition. Thing is, that works to Hill's advantage in the moral/legal area, in that just because Fury gave Cap a lot of slack, doesn't mean she is obligated to.


Always took it as Cap would work for them out of a Favor

If Shield and trouble and people in Danger Cap would work for them

But Cap has told them "Good day Sir"

And went about his buisness. Be like if the Police Ask me to watch out for strange people, I give the cops Info

Doesn't mean I HAVE to do it. I mean I like CAP with shield not under the payroll

Freelance people get paid, and benifits. Cap does not.

[IamtheRock3]

Questin you got to Ask..did Hill think by the Gesture Cap was going to seriously Lop her head off. Most people that didnt even cross thier mind
If not then Hill out of line


But lets say it Legal
I'm no lawyer

It was an Example of how thing may Go down in this registration To Cap.

[Red Lotus]

I am pretty sure your wrong

The cop cant hold a guy from 48 hour for standing there

Otherwise they would need ZERO explanation

Unless a Cop can Go to his superior and say "I am holding him for pure $hits and giggles" and not be penalize, and then your wrong

So unles you going to tell me that the case, I think there wrong. That not to say they cant FIND a reason to do it..but find it they must.

Being a cop requries CRAZY paperworkd

namely if your pulling out a piece on someone

Like I said that is what they call failure to comply with Police officers. If you're standing there and a Cop tells you to move you better move or he can detain you, he might just put you in the back seat of his car for ten minutes and tell you why you needed to move, but if you tick him off enough he might take you down to the station. And again you're thinking of what can happen after. The police hold people all the time to try to get warrants and evidence and what ever they can so they charge them with a crime.

They could have detained Cap then and if they wanted charge him for threatening Police Officers. Lets say a guy is playing baseball in the park. He is walking home with his bat in his hand and finds his self surrounded by cops. The guy has done nothing wrong, but if this guy tells the cops to drop their weapons or else what do you think is going to happen.

But my main point is this. If you are doing nothing at all and you know you haven't committed any crime, but a cop stops you and ask you for your id then tells you to go with them are you going to go? Do you feel you even have to. You did nothing wrong. So what gives this cop the right to ask you go with him. So why should you go.

[Gregg Helmberger]

Even if Cap was a full-fledged SHIELD agent and under Hill's command, we all know he isn't, and never has been, one to obey an order that he considers unjust. Remember, to his recollection, he was fighting his way through Nazi Germany a few years ago -- he knows what inevitably comes from blind obedience to unjust orders and unjust laws.

To me, that's the root of Cap's being anti-Reg. His attitudes were formed in an earlier time and tempered in WW2. Every Nazi he fought would have said he was just following orders, no matter how horrific the consequences. He understands that a soldier has not only the right but the duty to disobey unjust orders, just as citizens have not only the right but the duty to disobey unjust laws. Whether or not any of us sees the SHRA as unjust, Cap obviously does, and he has never been one for following orders when his heart tells him otherwise.

[StoneGold]

...

That is the dumbest thing I've heard yet.

Cap pointing his finger at Hill was justification for her to order her men to open fire on him?
No. Cap raising his shield, something he's used to maim/kill a few sentient beings with, is reason for her men to open fire with.

[StoneGold]

Hrrm. I'm not sure that flies as the inciting event for Civil War...
Because it wasn't. That was Nitro going boom.

[StoneGold]

Questin you got to Ask..did Hill think by the Gesture Cap was going to seriously Lop her head off. Most people that didnt even cross thier mind
Yeah, but most people aren't being yelled at by Captain America and having the weapon he killed Baron Blood with pointed at their head, all while refusing a general order from the head of SHIELD.


You're looking at this too much from the viewpoint of the reader. Look at it from the viewpoint of the character it actually happened to.

[Gregg Helmberger]

Because it wasn't. That was Nitro going boom.

Except if Cap doesn't go off the reservation and lead the resistance, there probably is no resistance. Nobody else in MU has the necessary elements to convince waverers to come onto his side and to lead them effectively. If Cap stays silent, there are resisters, sure, but I can't think of anyone else who turns resisters into a resistance. So, Cap busting out of the helicarrier was the first shot of the Civil War.

[FBHthelizardmage]

Personally, I think the only reason he's as anti-reg as he is, is because of how SHIELD attacked him so quickly in Civil War #1. I think that if they hadn't reacted as severely as they did, Cap would have fought the new law in a legal manner, if at all.

Cap: *expresses mild disagreement with the idea of registration*
Hill: "OMG! MOOKS ASSEMBLE!"

Seriously... I think she turned up for the wrong job interview, I expect that kinda attitude from Hydra, not Shield.

I also found it pretty funny how all those guys suddenly appeared

[Gregg Helmberger]

Cap: *expresses mild disagreement with the idea of registration*
Hill: "OMG! MOOKS ASSEMBLE!"

Seriously... I think she turned up for the wrong job interview, I expect that kinda attitude from Hydra, not Shield.

OTOH, "MOOKS ASSEMBLE!" is a brilliant title for a comic book issue.

[Jmacq1]

Maybe she -is- from Hydra, given the subplots running in New Avengers up until all this started.

But incidentally, pointing a finger with a shield attached to the arm is a -huge- difference from plucking the shield off his arm and raising it in a double-handed posture to lop Hill's head off. And if you really think Hill and the SHIELD agents are so stupid as to confuse the two (or to believe that Cap is going to casually lop off the SHIELD Director's head at the drop of a hat), then that just proves the point that she has absolutely no business running an organization like SHIELD.

[StoneGold]

Except if Cap doesn't go off the reservation and lead the resistance, there probably is no resistance. Nobody else in MU has the necessary elements to convince waverers to come onto his side and to lead them effectively. If Cap stays silent, there are resisters, sure, but I can't think of anyone else who turns resisters into a resistance. So, Cap busting out of the helicarrier was the first shot of the Civil War.
Any stupider than, oh, say, the asssassination of Archduke Ferdinand? Or the Boston Massacre? Or the Gulf of Tonkin?



Not every war is sparked by something as clear cut as Germany invading Poland.

[StoneGold]

Maybe she -is- from Hydra, given the subplots running in New Avengers up until all this started.

But incidentally, pointing a finger with a shield attached to the arm is a -huge- difference from plucking the shield off his arm and raising it in a double-handed posture to lop Hill's head off. And if you really think Hill and the SHIELD agents are so stupid as to confuse the two (or to believe that Cap is going to casually lop off the SHIELD Director's head at the drop of a hat), then that just proves the point that she has absolutely no business running an organization like SHIELD.
First, you now have to say that every cop who has ever shot a person going for their wallet, or anything other than a weapon, is now guilty of murder for that statement to work. Next, you have to assume that Hill wasn't just looking for a pretext to arrest Cap anyways, and being threatened with the weapon that maimed/killed two generations of Zemos is a pretty decent pretext.


Now what was stupid was assuming that her SHIELD task force would be enough to bring down Cap. But that's an entirely different story.

[Gregg Helmberger]

Any stupider than, oh, say, the asssassination of Archduke Ferdinand? Or the Boston Massacre? Or the Gulf of Tonkin?



Not every war is sparked by something as clear cut as Germany invading Poland.

Yes. Yes, I can safely say that pointing at someone is a stupider reason for starting a war than either the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand or the Boston Massacre.

Gulf of Tonkin, ya got me there. That was an idiotic non-reason to start a war that we never should have gotten into to begin with.

[Violently Apathetic]

But incidentally, pointing a finger with a shield attached to the arm is a -huge- difference from plucking the shield off his arm and raising it in a double-handed posture to lop Hill's head off.

I agree, comparing it to a raised gun or any sort of weapon is a little much, it's more like a gun still in its holster. I mean I can admit that Cap made a mistake smacking Tony in the face with his shield later, people should be able to admit that Hill jumped the gun a little bit, no matter how they feel about registration.

[Morw]

The funny thing is that it was not SHIELD that attcked capt. it was captain america that attacked SHIELD. I was reading Civilwar #1 director's cut where the last part of the comic is a page by page desc of the scene with notes from the writters.

Now consider caps track record on how he responce in diffrent situation ( he normally use force) it would be danm stupid of hill to not have backup. So the Cape killers precense is not so unplaces as you may think.

He also gives the soldiers order's. That indicatra that he is working for them ( he has to follow orders even if he is a freelancer or get fired) And Hill gives him several oppertunity to end it peacefully. the cap is just stubborn and is basicly itching for a fight. ANd its not the finger poining that sumons the cape killer. its his words. Cap is basicly saying that he will break that law, and more imporantly he is basicly saying that he belives the superheros are above the law. That's where he stepps over the line. And yet, Hill tries to reason with him. But also show's him the consqvense of breaking the law. If you break the law then your a criminal. Thats how the law work's. Like it or not. He also treathens the cape killes when they dont follow his orders ( why should he, if he was not a SHIELD operative think he can give those soldiers any order's? can a civilian order a swat team around if he doesnt like where they are standing?)

What is her responce? "tranquliser on boys, get ready" Now she even tells him that the cape killes wont use leathal force, and its the last warning he get. And what is caps respnoce? he curses at her and calling it all insane. ( insane to be asked to follow a law? )

Then there is the attack frame where you see cap busting threw two soldiers as Hill scream's " Tranquilizers! NOW! " Now in the directors cut comic book the writter has written this about the scene
2/ Pull back for a big bicture as Cap just cuts loose and takes these guys down, several of them suddenly panicked into action and responing as Maria barks an order:

So cap attacked first, that would not stand well up in court, "yes sir. I was talking with Hill and the argument got heated so I just attack the people she had around to protect herself from me. No sire I dont think I have an anger managment problem"

[StoneGold]

Yes. Yes, I can safely say that pointing at someone is a stupider reason for starting a war than either the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand or the Boston Massacre.


See, and that's the problem, you keep saying pointing at someone. It's not pointing at someone. It's raising one of the most potent weapons on the earth at someone. A weapon that has apparently killed the Red Skull at least twice. Which changes the nature of things.


Still, I do think she was trying to goad Cap into doing something stupid. Which he did, raising the shield arm. That said, she also didn't prepare enough for the consequences.


No, really, was this stupider than beating up a kid who was falsly accusing a British officer for not paying his haircut bill? Really?

[StoneGold]

I agree, comparing it to a raised gun or any sort of weapon is a little much, it's more like a gun still in its holster. I mean I can admit that Cap made a mistake smacking Tony in the face with his shield later, people should be able to admit that Hill jumped the gun a little bit, no matter how they feel about registration.
Thing is, Cap doesn't have to take the shield off his arm to use it as a weapon. It's not just for throwing. He also uses it as a blunt weapon attached to his arm.


Remember that scene in X2, where the cop tells Logan to drop the knives? That's what I'm saying this is closer to. The very fact that he had a weapon on him, that he was now raising, makes him a potential threat. Especially when one is looking for a potential threat.

[Captain Exaggeration]

I am not sure where you are coming from here. Do you see Cap and Iron Man NOT being friends, before CW? And that's why cap wants to beat the living daylight out of Tony?
They're also still friends... well... sort of.

[Gregg Helmberger]

See, and that's the problem, you keep saying pointing at someone. It's not pointing at someone. It's raising one of the most potent weapons on the earth at someone. A weapon that has apparently killed the Red Skull at least twice. Which changes the nature of things.


Still, I do think she was trying to goad Cap into doing something stupid. Which he did, raising the shield arm. That said, she also didn't prepare enough for the consequences.


No, really, was this stupider than beating up a kid who was falsly accusing a British officer for not paying his haircut bill? Really?

As a matter of fact, yes. Assuming that the person with the most sterling reputation in the entire world posed a threat because he was carrying a weapon that he always carries and for no other reason would be intensely, staggeringly stupid of Hill.

That said, I don't think that's why she did what she did. I think she did what she did because she's a dumbass who's in way over her head and realizes it, and therefore is prone to making bad, belligerent decisions.

[FBHthelizardmage]

OTOH, "MOOKS ASSEMBLE!" is a brilliant title for a comic book issue.

That it is... I should use it somewhere... if I ever write a comic book

[Morw]

Cap also has a reputation to solve problems with his fist, something he proves now. Hill did the right thing in the scene. She never say he is under arrrest or that he cant leave, he doenst even try to leave. He is the one trying to gett into a fight, she is the one trying to explain to him why the law is a good thing as well wanting the best man to convinse the hero's to reg.

She is trying to save life's there, not civilians but superhero's life. All casulites of the war does now lie on cap's shoulder becouse the law will be enforced and it is no matter how you look at it a resnebol law. The few problems with the law can be fixed by working within the system. Not from the outside.

[StoneGold]

As a matter of fact, yes. Assuming that the person with the most sterling reputation in the entire world posed a threat because he was carrying a weapon that he always carries and for no other reason would be intensely, staggeringly stupid of Hill.
And again, you're either missing the point, not reading the entire statement, or both. She wanted an excuse to arrest Cap. Cap raising his shield at her, especially while yelling at her, can easily be interpreted as assault, giving her more than just cause for making the arrest. Now, was the arrest about the assault? No. It was about putting Cap away so he couldn't rally the troops against the SHRA. The arrest itself wasn't a stupid move. The lack of it's effectiveness was.


What, do you really think Cap would have just gone along with the SHRA if they had asked nicely? He once spent 18 issues fighting against being controlled by the feds. A year and a half of issues as a fugitive from the government.

[Violently Apathetic]

Thing is, Cap doesn't have to take the shield off his arm to use it as a weapon. It's not just for throwing. He also uses it as a blunt weapon attached to his arm.


So if he was raising his arm throughout the entire conversation because he was a hand talker that would also be justification to threaten him? Come on now, you're really stretching it. Cap expressed an opinion that Hill clearly didn't like and she had her goons point their guns at him. At that point the worst thing you could accuse Cap of is being belligerent. He wasn't threatening anyone or promising to fight registration to the death, he was saying he didn't agree and then Hill demonstrated the exact thing Cap was afraid of, SHIELD's desire for control and that anyone who isn't with them is against them. Cap hasn't been a saint in all this by any stretch but Hill was the one who escalated the situation in this instance.

Edit: Well, I'm an idiot, I basically agree with your above comment. Hill was just looking for a reason to arrest him, yadda, yadda, I thought you were saying it was a perfectly reasonable action, not that she could use it as a legitimate excuse. Sorry about that.

[StoneGold]

Edit: Well, I'm an idiot, I basically agree with your above comment. Hill was just looking for a reason to arrest him, yadda, yadda, I thought you were saying it was a perfectly reasonable action, not that she could use it as a legitimate excuse. Sorry about that.
You aren't the only one. I'm starting to think I should have bolded it. My argument isn't that it was the moral thing to do, but that it was legal, and depending on your perspective, could have been the right thing to do. What was wrong no matter how you look at it was the way she failed at apprehending Cap.

[FBHthelizardmage]

Yes. Yes, I can safely say that pointing at someone is a stupider reason for starting a war than either the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand or the Boston Massacre.

Gulf of Tonkin, ya got me there. That was an idiotic non-reason to start a war that we never should have gotten into to begin with.

The Gulf of Tonkin wasn't so much a stupid reason to start a war, as a transparent excuse.

[FBHthelizardmage]

You aren't the only one. I'm starting to think I should have bolded it. My argument isn't that it was the moral thing to do, but that it was legal, and depending on your perspective, could have been the right thing to do. What was wrong no matter how you look at it was the way she failed at apprehending Cap.

I'm not sure how it is in america, but if a cop just decided to arrest you because he didn't like your face and then hold you for 48 in britain, he'd very likely end up facing a charge of wrongful arrest.

[IamtheRock3]

Yeah, but most people aren't being yelled at by Captain America and having the weapon he killed Baron Blood with pointed at their head, all while refusing a general order from the head of SHIELD.


You're looking at this too much from the viewpoint of the reader. Look at it from the viewpoint of the character it actually happened to.


Yes Ask same Question

With Hill knoweldge. Did she think Cap was going to commit homicide and lopped her head off

or was she just being a bitch

signs point to her being a bitch. The shield just happen to be on the pointing finger. Hill didnt even mention her being in danger.

[IamtheRock3]

I'm not sure how it is in america, but if a cop just decided to arrest you because he didn't like your face and then hold you for 48 in britain, he'd very likely end up facing a charge of wrongful arrest.


thank you
that way I see it.

[IamtheRock3]

oh wait never mind


Read your response about it just being an excuse.

[FBHthelizardmage]

I also don't particularly see what Hill did as being legal.

I can imagine what I'd say if I was on the oversite commitee.

"So, Captain America said he didn't like the idea of registration and regarded it as a distraction from fighting supervillains... so you ordered your new "cape killer" detachment to surround him and aim loaded weapons at him while effectively threatening him with arrest under a law that hadn't even been passed yet if he disagreed... your fired."

[IamtheRock3]

in fairness goverment have gotten away with worst.

[Gregg Helmberger]

And again, you're either missing the point, not reading the entire statement, or both. She wanted an excuse to arrest Cap. Cap raising his shield at her, especially while yelling at her, can easily be interpreted as assault, giving her more than just cause for making the arrest. Now, was the arrest about the assault? No. It was about putting Cap away so he couldn't rally the troops against the SHRA. The arrest itself wasn't a stupid move. The lack of it's effectiveness was.


What, do you really think Cap would have just gone along with the SHRA if they had asked nicely? He once spent 18 issues fighting against being controlled by the feds. A year and a half of issues as a fugitive from the government.

I'll fess up to being an idiot too. I think I pretty much agree with you. Sorry to pick a baseless fight.

[StoneGold]

I also don't particularly see what Hill did as being legal.

I can imagine what I'd say if I was on the oversite commitee.

"So, Captain America said he didn't like the idea of registration and regarded it as a distraction from fighting supervillains... so you ordered your new "cape killer" detachment to surround him and aim loaded weapons at him while effectively threatening him with arrest under a law that hadn't even been passed yet if he disagreed... your fired."
And that's why Hill can bring up that Captain America, a lawless vigilante, comitted assault against her, a duly appointed officer of the law. And I'm sure there is video. And suddenly, it's all nice and legal.

[OdinSon1]

Again, I stress the fact that the government has screwed Cap over several times over the years.

When he refused to take direct orders and become the government's personal bounty hunter, they made him give up being Captain America.

When he was wrongly suspected of treason, he was exiled from the country, and again forced to give up being Captain America.

This is the third major time that the government has tried to force Cap and other heroes into servitude, and when he refused he was assaulted, and now he and every other un-registered hero, not just anti-registration, but every unregistered hero is being persecuted and if caught forced into compliance or punishment.

Captain America has been getting the business from the government for years, he hasn't ever fully trusted them since, and what reason have they given him to?

And like he's gonna trust Tony Stark? Stark's been in line with the government for years so he can keep his big money government contracts, and so that they stay out of his illegal business affairs. Tony's a sellout, not that I blame him since its in his own best interests, but Cap knows better than to hear out his side.

Cap doesn't have any contracts or business ventures that force him to obey the government. Cap's a man who still believes in the principal ideal of America, freedom.

[jackolover]

You know. I've been reading this whole thread, after pinting it out, to get an idea of what people are saying, and I got very angry, (which is a good thing). Both sides, pro and anti, really got stuck into this issue, and I started to realise how close to policing, the public wants to make the capes operation. Policing, as a method by capes, is just so dictatorial. As the public, if you're not part of a police operation, you don't notice it. But if you get caught up in it, the system just drags you away for any reason it likes! Multiply that x 10 if capes were to get involved.

All I see is Shield running around, making a great effort to blackmail capes under their control. All, to get capes to take orders, or else. Shield hangs a threat over the heads of the capes, instead of giving the capes a ... (what is the word?), so the capes have an aim to achieve, and it's up to them how they carry it out.

Examples

FF- take care of any bizzare high tech intruder
NA - beat down any big invasions
X-Men - keep the mutants in check.

But not breaking apart these groups and giving them lone tasks. It destroys the capes imperitive to act independantly, which is what we thought the act would allow. Instead, shield tells the capes all the parameters they can operate in. Just like Secret Wars. Fury got a load of Capes together, and didn't tell them what for. Just, 'get in there and blow up the place'. Makes me so mad.

Police method is designed for cops on the ground, limited by their low mobility on foot. The capes fly around, so they don't need the police method. Sure, Spidey takes care of crooks in car chases with guns. But when he has to distract the Hulk from a built up area, he isn't going to say to joe public, 'Now move along, or I'll arrest you'. He hasn't got time!. He has to beat a path to Central Park, so no one gets hurt. Police method is not going to do this kind of job, and Spidey needs the freedom to operate, which the immobility of the foot cops can't do.

[IamtheRock3]

And that's why Hill can bring up that Captain America, a lawless vigilante, comitted assault against her, a duly appointed officer of the law. And I'm sure there is video. And suddenly, it's all nice and legal.

wasnt lawless at the time.

[FBHthelizardmage]

And that's why Hill can bring up that Captain America, a lawless vigilante, comitted assault against her, a duly appointed officer of the law. And I'm sure there is video. And suddenly, it's all nice and legal.

Except that's not at all how it happened. Considering the law wasn't past till the next week, Cap expresses disagreement with Hill and say he doesn't want to go hunt down his friends... at which point Hill pops up a platoon of mooks to hold him at gun point... for some reason.

Also considering he's already "registered" as it were anyway. Everyone knows who he is, he's trained by the goverment and so on and so on.

I'm sure Hill can lie about it, and probabbly has, but there's no excuse for her behavior. If anything I'm betting this whole plot will be resolved by us finding she's an agent of some evil or the other.

[Iangould]

Everyone thinks that Captain America is a U.S. Government follower, a super-soldier, who follows orders from the gornverment without second thought. This made me think that Captain America would have sides with the government and been pro-reg but really what Captain America is suppossed to stand for is America. America as in the people and freedom. He is siding with freedom, the freedom to keep your identity to yourself. I expected Cap to side with the reg at first because he had nothing to lose, and always seemes like a hero who was very loyal to his superiors (US government)instead he just showed me that he stands for freedom of the people.

I agree wirth abotu 95% of what you say but I think Cap would've obeyed the law at least until it had been tested in the supreme court and would probably have tried to speak out against or simply go on strike rather than going directly to the use of violence (I can see Cap sitting in Leavenworth for refusing to obey the law's provisions.)

[Donald Stone]

No. Cap raising his shield, something he's used to maim/kill a few sentient beings with, is reason for her men to open fire with.Considering he was standing there calmly telling Hill not to do it when she gave the order, I think you seriously reaching.

[Morw]

Seems people forgot what I wrote, but heck I can repat it.

1. Cap attacked the cape killers before they lossend one shoot at him.

2. Cap declears himself above the law.

3. Cap tries to order the cape killers around, when Hill overrules his order he threathens the cape killer. ANd then he as pointed out in point 1. attacksthem.

So in any court of law, on any reveiw board, etc. Hill did the right thing, she never in the conversation sadi he was under arrest, she never say he cannot leave. Cap stay of his own accord and contiues to argue with her, and he is showing signs of getting pissed of. He yells at her, curse her, trries to order her around etc. And anybody with a little knowledge knows what Cap normally does tho people that pisses him off. He tries to beat them up. So getting backup incase cap decided ( as he did) to attack her is well with in her right as aleader of SHIELD.

He was not standing calmly and telling her no, It was a heated argument. Its pretty clear in the comic book but even more clear if you get hold of Civil war #1 directors cut and read the comment about the scene in the back of the book.

[Jmacq1]

Cap didn't necessarily say he was above the law. He said the heroes had to be above -politics-. There's a difference there. When a law is more politically motivated than anything else, it may not be good for the long term, no matter how many people supposedly support it.

In Cap's view, the SHRA is just a political backlash from Stamford. From the point of view of someone that's seen the Japanese internment camps during WW II, I think he probably understands the potential for disaster in knee-jerk reactions to events. More importantly, he sees how empty the Registration act really is: Penalizing those that are trying to -help- rather than blaming the people that are -truly- at fault for 99 percent of the metahuman-related deaths in the Marvel Universe: The Supervillains. Of course, it's easier for the government to use a drafted scapegoat than point the finger at (for example) an megalomaniacal leader of a small Eastern European nation. Or a criminal genius that was smart enough to keep himself from being pinned down for any real crimes for years. They can therefore punish someone to show the public that they're looking out for them, even if the real perpetrators go free. Cause y'know it'd look bad if the government said: "Sorry, we can't really capture Dr. Doom. He's just too smart and powerful for us."

And secondly, Hill may never have said he couldn't leave, but her actions, much like Tony's in Civil War #3, implied that Cap was going to be attacked and/or captured regardless of the argument, unless Cap just suddenly decided to become Hill's boot-licking toady.

I really can't believe fathom how anyone honestly believes Hill was -not- the aggressor/escalator in that situation. Who was Cap going to attack if she -hadn't- surrounded him with armed soldiers prepared to take him down (or so they thought)? Cap's not an idiot, he can read the writing on the wall, so yes, he struck first because to do otherwise meant he'd be rotting in some secret SHIELD prison till god knows when. If Hill had -any- intention of letting him go, all she had to do was point a finger and say, "Get out. We'll call you back after you've had a couple days to cool off."

And guess what? It probably would have worked. It certainly wouldn't have forced Cap into the "Underground" nearly so quickly, much less before Tony could actually sit him down and -talk- to him.

It's also terribly frightening to me that there are so many people that would apparently unquestioningly obey any authority figure or law simply because "it's the law!" or "everyone supports it so it's all democratic and stuff!"

[Donald Stone]

Seems people forgot what I wrote, but heck I can repat it.

1. Cap attacked the cape killers before they lossend one shoot at him.Bullshit

2. Cap declears himself above the law.No, he says superheros have to be above polotics, but don't let that stop you.

3. Cap tries to order the cape killers around, when Hill overrules his order he threathens the cape killer. ANd then he as pointed out in point 1. attacksthem.No, he tells them to stand down, and tells them (correctly) that if they try to arrest him they could get hurt. He's trying not to hurt these soldiers, but Hill forces the issue.

So in any court of law, on any reveiw board, etc. Hill did the right thing, she never in the conversation sadi he was under arrest, she never say he cannot leave. Cap stay of his own accord and contiues to argue with her, and he is showing signs of getting pissed of. He yells at her, curse her, trries to order her around etc. And anybody with a little knowledge knows what Cap normally does tho people that pisses him off. He tries to beat them up. So getting backup incase cap decided ( as he did) to attack her is well with in her right as aleader of SHIELD.
I'm finding it hard to believe you've even read the same comic I have.

[FBHthelizardmage]

The funniest line from Hill is that people don't like living in the wild west... while her minions point guns at him.

I mean come ON! He said he didn't like the way things were going, and and thought the law was unfair/a bad idea.

How the HELL can this be an excuse to have a platoon of security troops pop up and point guns at him.

Hill is either insane or an agent provocator (wow that was a bad word to spell)

[Jeff-E]

Bullshit
No, he tells them to stand down, and tells them (correctly) that if they try to arrest him they could get hurt. He's trying not to hurt these soldiers, but Hill forces the issue.


I'm trying to stay out of the arguement you and Morw are having however I do wish to interject one thing just to this point in paticular, if a police officer, and effectively that is what S.H.I.E.L.D. officer's are law enforcement officials, tries to arrest you, you do NOT have the right or the responsibility to resist them through violent means.

[Donald Stone]

I'm trying to stay out of the arguement you and Morw are having however I do wish to interject one thing just to this point in paticular, if a police officer, and effectively that is what S.H.I.E.L.D. officer's are law enforcement officials, tries to arrest you, you do NOT have the right or the responsibility to resist them through violent means.This is true in the real world. However, this is the MU, and Cap has told people to surrender so he doesn't have to hurt them, and I'd be shocked if he's never done it to government agents before.

This is Captain F'n America. He was giving those troops a chance to stop so he didn't have to hurt them, cause no matter what Cap thinks of the brass he prefers not to hurt grunts if he doesn't have to.

[Jeff-E]

This is true in the real world. However, this is the MU, and Cap has told people to surrender so he doesn't have to hurt them, and I'd be shocked if he's never done it to government agents before.

This is Captain F'n America. He was giving those troops a chance to stop so he didn't have to hurt them, cause no matter what Cap thinks of the brass he prefers not to hurt grunts if he doesn't have to.

I agree with you on actually on everypoint, I just think he could have handled the situation better than immediatly resorting to violence, i.e. say he surrenders, or that he was working for them then bolt at the first chance.

[Donald Stone]

I just think he could have handled the situation better than immediatly resorting to violence.But Cap didn't resort to violence. Hill attack him, and he had to defend himself.

How in the hell is it Cap's fault some dizzy dame orders him shot?

[Morw]

Bullshit

No, he says superheros have to be above polotics, but don't let that stop you.

No, he tells them to stand down, and tells them (correctly) that if they try to arrest him they could get hurt. He's trying not to hurt these soldiers, but Hill forces the issue.

I'm finding it hard to believe you've even read the same comic I have.


Okey. If you read the post I had earlier about the subject on this very thread then you would see that I point to Civel war #1 directors cut. It contains the normal story of the first issue as well as the ediotr remarks on about each page. In that editorial the writter clearly states that cap cuts loose on the cape killer before the shoot back. You can actully see it on page as well. If you pay close attention. When hill gives the order "tranquilisers! now!" in that very frame you see Cap attacking two cape killers. The next image is the shoots. Now if they shoot first then there would naturaly been tranq darts in that same frame as she gives the order. But according to the writter she gives the order because he cuts loose.

As for the poltics, the poltic we are talking about is the politics of Lawmaking and laws. Wicth kinda is the same as talking about The law and how to enforce the law. If somebody is saying they are above the enforcment of the law then they are saying they are above the law. Simply becouse he refuse to follow the law. The law might be stupid but it is the law and you cant forcefully change the law by attacking the grunts.

He tells them to stand down or he will beat them up. Now for me that is a treath. Espesially since he dont understand that he does not have the right to give that order.

As for the same comics. I havent seen a single cap america comic where he has not fought somebody and just talked the bad guys down. I have how ever seen alot of cap aemrica comics where he acts like a brute and is arrogant. Maybe I see it becouse im not american and sees him as just one of the other superhero's.

As for the hills comment on wild west etc. its pretty accurate and the whole scene is showing the old west meeting the new world. In the new world we have SWAT teams to take out bandits. He dont offer the bandits a chanes for a dual at high noon. We swarm the bad guys with swat teams and tries to keep the civilians safe. But we also triy to negotiate a surrender if we can. when is the last time you saw any super hero did just that? I have seen spierman do it and Cain ( jugenaut) do it.

[Morw]

But Cap didn't resort to violence. Hill attack him, and he had to defend himself.

How in the hell is it Cap's fault some dizzy dame orders him shot?

Well the only problem is that she order him shoot with tranq darts after he attackes her men. There is nothing in that comic that says that he could not have just walked away. she doenst try to arrest him, infact I dare you to find her saying "your under arrest" in that comic book.

[Donald Stone]

she doenst try to arrest him, infact I dare you to find her saying "your under arrest" in that comic book.Of course. I guess the tranq darts where just a SHIELD way of saying goodbye.

[Jeff-E]

But Cap didn't resort to violence. Hill attack him, and he had to defend himself.

How in the hell is it Cap's fault some dizzy dame orders him shot?


Again that's part of the problem, here we have to assume that the MU has a similar law structure as our world, in which case
1) He was in a military installation and as such he is subject to being under the base commanders jurisdiction.

2) As I stated above, even if you are innocent if a law enforcement official attempts to arrest you, it is your duty to comply. There are way's to get out later, and lawfully.

Now don't get me wrong, as a comic's fan that was an awesome scene, as a Captain America fan that was an awesome scene, I just don't think it was a very strategic move on Cap's part, and as someone who is Pro reg I don't think it was smart or the right thing to do.

[Morw]

The tranq darts is to stopp him from killing her soldiers who is just doing their job. Is it so hard to get into your head that hill knew she needed protetion against Cap if he turned down the offer? she has dealt with him before she knows how he reacts. He could have said no and left. Then he would not have seen the cape killers. But he had to argue, he had to say he was above the law ( and politics and law does in some cases meld into one, the politics of making and uppholding a law is such case) He had to yell at her he had to get angry ( according to the writters) he had to attack first. ( again according to the writter)

ANd dont say he had no choice, he could have pretended to play along as he did with Ironman. ( before he attacked him) that would have easly brought hyim closer to the people who actully make the law and he could have influnced them ( very easily with his status) to make a better law. Instead he thinks he has the right to decide wich law he should follow and with he should ignore. Sorry the wolrd dont work like that.

[Jake V]

Sorry to interject, but I believe the comic was meant to be ambiguous as to who took the first shot. Hill WAS ordering Cap to support SHIELD in catching rogue superheroes, but it wasn't illegal for Cap to decide not to follow the order.

Hill and SHIELD are dirty, and have been since New Avengers started. Cap wasn't breaking any laws by refusing to do what she told him to do.

I'd say that Cap DOES consider himself above SOME laws: the unjust kind. But that isn't an issue here because SHIELD started pointing their guns at him before any registration act went in effect.

[Morw]

I have two problems with that jake V

1. Cap attacked the SHIELD, not vice versa and at that point it does not matter if she tried to give him an order he didnt like. You dont reponde in that way when it comes to the legal matter of the scene.

2. Why should he have the right to decide what law's are unjust? Can I do that to? can Green Goblin do that to and get away with it? I guess green Goblin think its unjust that he cant be allowed to legaly kill spiderman for messing up for him. where do we sett the line of who has the right to decide to not follow unjust law's? Why not follow the system? you know there are ways to get rid of unjust laws. USA got rid of many unjust laws threw the history. ANd the closer you come to your time the less the use of violence have been used to change law's. Now you must be a danm fool if you think you can use violence to change the congress veiw on a law to stopp violence.

Or to make an example: how do you think it would effect a law stricter gun police if the NRA decided to demostrate against it by shooting at the cops?

[Conn Seanery]

As for the same comics. I havent seen a single cap america comic where he has not fought somebody and just talked the bad guys down. I have how ever seen alot of cap aemrica comics where he acts like a brute and is arrogant. Maybe I see it becouse im not american and sees him as just one of the other superhero's.
How about in that same issue? You don't see it, but it gets reported back that Cap took out the pilot of the jet he hitched a ride on for a burger and fries. Why didn't he just knock him out? Is that the action of an arrogant brute?

I think Cap knows when people are going to let their weapons do the talking for them. Catch him now, talk later. Security in numbers. Being surrounded by soldiers all CHIK-CHAKing their weapons while Hill tells them "Tranquilizers on, boys. Get ready..." doesn't exactly diffuse the tension. That entire encounter was Hill's fault, and I don't blame Cap one bit for reacting the way he did (and i'm pro-registration).

[Jeff-E]

How about in that same issue? You don't see it, but it gets reported back that Cap took out the pilot of the jet he hitched a ride on for a burger and fries. Why didn't he just knock him out? Is that the action of an arrogant brute?

I think Cap knows when people are going to let their weapons do the talking for them. Catch him now, talk later. Security in numbers. Being surrounded by soldiers all CHIK-CHAKing their weapons while Hill tells them "Tranquilizers on, boys. Get ready..." doesn't exactly diffuse the tension. That entire encounter was Hill's fault, and I don't blame Cap one bit for reacting the way he did (and i'm pro-registration).

Of course the guy was no threat he was one lone pilot, and the other guy was Captain Friggin America (his name actually gets cooler with the word friggin in it):D. I just still think in the end he didn't have to fight his way out. But I'm probably also the only guy who thinks in the end, and I think it now, that S.H.I.E.L.D. Director Maria Hill isn't corrupt so much as she is a "yes man". I don't think she thinks well for herself and needs help from others to do so, and the powers that be probably thought she would be easier to control than Fury sympathisers.

[Jake V]

I have two problems with that jake V

1. Cap attacked the SHIELD, not vice versa and at that point it does not matter if she tried to give him an order he didnt like. You dont reponde in that way when it comes to the legal matter of the scene.
As I said before, who attacked who first is purposefully ambiguous. Cap might have made his move at the exact second Hill ordered the men to fire. What IS the logical response to a bunch of goons pointing guns at you for no reason?

2. Why should he have the right to decide what law's are unjust? Can I do that to? can Green Goblin do that to and get away with it? I guess green Goblin think its unjust that he cant be allowed to legaly kill spiderman for messing up for him. where do we sett the line of who has the right to decide to not follow unjust law's? Why not follow the system? you know there are ways to get rid of unjust laws. USA got rid of many unjust laws threw the history. ANd the closer you come to your time the less the use of violence have been used to change law's. Now you must be a danm fool if you think you can use violence to change the congress veiw on a law to stopp violence.
Sometimes the system is wrong. Cap isn't going around picking fights with the government, he'd doing what he always did: beating up supervillains and saving innocent people. He only responded with violence to Iron Man after his goons took down Wiccan and Cloak. He only fought SHIELD when they surrounded him and pointed guns at him for no reason. He isn't saying "I don't like your laws so I'm going to beat you up", he's doing what he always did. And if SHIELD wants to start shooting at him, he's going to have to defend himself.

Or to make an example: how do you think it would effect a law stricter gun police if the NRA decided to demostrate against it by shooting at the cops?
The example doesn't really apply because there was no stricter law when Cap met with Hill. If police came up to a gun owner who legally owned a gun and told him that in a week his gun would be illegal, and then trained their own guns at him in an attempt to enforce a law that wasn't on the books yet... yeah, I'd say that you're able to defend yourself.

Cap isn't trying to blow up a Hellicarrier here.

[Morw]

How about in that same issue? You don't see it, but it gets reported back that Cap took out the pilot of the jet he hitched a ride on for a burger and fries. Why didn't he just knock him out? Is that the action of an arrogant brute?

I think Cap knows when people are going to let their weapons do the talking for them. Catch him now, talk later. Security in numbers. Being surrounded by soldiers all CHIK-CHAKing their weapons while Hill tells them "Tranquilizers on, boys. Get ready..." doesn't exactly diffuse the tension. That entire encounter was Hill's fault, and I don't blame Cap one bit for reacting the way he did (and i'm pro-registration).


So if I highjack a car and takes the driver for hamburger and fries at the local drive in its suddenly allright? And i never said he was a brute 100% of the time. But to be honest if I was the pilot and cap after pulling that stunt on me and then said in a jolly tone " lets go for hamburger and fries" I would not dare to say no to him. I would consider mysefl kidnapped.

As for cap thinking that weapon would do the talking for them. Maybe for him, Hill was not interrested in attacking him. As for defusing the situation. calling her insane, barking orders as he runs the place, claiming the law is wrong and I wont follow it. Are to not ways to defuse the situation. Im not saying that Hill is blameless, but why should it ONLY be Hill's job to defuse the situation when Cap act like he does? Should he not take some responsebility? Thats the problem with a guy like cap. It seems people sides with him just becouse he is the cap. If lets say we change the whole scen and insert Iron man in the scene instead of capt. Then i bet more would say Iron man was edgy for a fight.

I look at the scene as a hero been given an order and he repondes in the worst possibol way, forcing the the argument to gett more heated and when the hero decide he has had egnough he attacks. Could Hill have dealt with it better? yes ofcourse she could, could Cap got out of the situation without fighitng, yes he had several chances to get away peacefully: he could have played along, he could have left before the debat got heated, he could have said that he needed time to think about it etc. I have seriuse doupt Hill would arrest him if cap had said he needed to think about it for a few days as the law was not in force yet.

[Morw]

As I said before, who attacked who first is purposefully ambiguous. Cap might have made his move at the exact second Hill ordered the men to fire. What IS the logical response to a bunch of goons pointing guns at you for no reason?

If they are lawenforcer of military personell and your on military ground. you surrender and do as they say. The last thing you legally entitled to is attacking them.

Sometimes the system is wrong. Cap isn't going around picking fights with the government, he'd doing what he always did: beating up supervillains and saving innocent people. He only responded with violence to Iron Man after his goons took down Wiccan and Cloak. He only fought SHIELD when they surrounded him and pointed guns at him for no reason. He isn't saying "I don't like your laws so I'm going to beat you up", he's doing what he always did. And if SHIELD wants to start shooting at him, he's going to have to defend himself.

In cap's mind he doing that, but for the rest of the world he is not. First of he is breaking the law so the law has the right to arrest him. As for his responce towards Ironman, they only putt two of his members to sleep. two criminals in the law. In the act of commiting a crime, And then he was given the chance to talk his way out of it. he did ofcourse not chose that way. No he is cap friggin america, he has to fight. As for SHIELD wanitng to shoot at him, no.. they wanted him to lead them. that was the offer he was given.

The example doesn't really apply because there was no stricter law when Cap met with Hill. If police came up to a gun owner who legally owned a gun and told him that in a week his gun would be illegal, and then trained their own guns at him in an attempt to enforce a law that wasn't on the books yet... yeah, I'd say that you're able to defend yourself.

Cap isn't trying to blow up a Hellicarrier here.

No, you missunderstand abit, it would be more like the police going to inform the gunowner about the new law and asking for his coaperation and the gunowner responding that he is going to break that law, when the cops get nervouse ( the guy ownes alot of weapon after all) and tries to tell him why the new law is comming the gun owner tells that police that the new law is bullshitt and starts to act aggreesiv. In wicth point the police calls for backup etc. that is how the whole scen would be in our world. Now would the police get in trouble for having to shoot the gun owner down as the gun owner went for his gun? no. The same applies for the scene.

its quite simple: if hill gave the order first then she is the bad guy there, If cap attacked first then she is merly a officer doing her duty and should have payed more attention to the negotion class while cap america is the bad guy.

The writters say cap attacked first.

[Capt Hunter]

Hill is on someones payrole... other then the United States Government... Why the hell did Nick Fury go underground like he did....

This can of worms is open people.. Civil War is a metaphore (sp) for whats going on the US Government as of late pertaining to the War over in Iraq...

This story arch all comes from New Avengers #1... Some villian is starting these events and making look like the heroes are to blame... I say that there is a Group of Individuals like the Illuminati that is control the events in the world. Hydra is involved no doubt and I'll bet the Red Skull/ Alexander Lukin is in the mix somewhere...

Captain America knows when things are going bad... its just his thing.... and to throw out another theory, Yelena Belova, is probably Agent Hill in disguise...

Its been said by Ms. Marvel is gonna regret what she is doing in upcoming arcs.... but who knows, I could be completely off base here.....

[IamtheRock3]

Again that's part of the problem, here we have to assume that the MU has a similar law structure as our world, in which case
1) He was in a military installation and as such he is subject to being under the base commanders jurisdiction.

2) As I stated above, even if you are innocent if a law enforcement official attempts to arrest you, it is your duty to comply. There are way's to get out later, and lawfully.

Now don't get me wrong, as a comic's fan that was an awesome scene, as a Captain America fan that was an awesome scene, I just don't think it was a very strategic move on Cap's part, and as someone who is Pro reg I don't think it was smart or the right thing to do.


Thing is may of been a smart move

Look how FAIR the legal systerm in Frontline. He butt would of been tossed into the negative Zone, And it swept under the Radar, without the news hearing to much about it.

[IamtheRock3]

Also in the Real World

Yea Hill MIGHT be able to hold him...but then she may be fired if people found out the reason. Is a thing called wrongfull arrest.

That IF the law is fair and not just tossing him in some hole in Anartica.

[Morw]

Also in the Real World

Yea Hill MIGHT be able to hold him...but then she may be fired if people found out the reason. Is a thing called wrongfull arrest.

That IF the law is fair and not just tossing him in some hole in Anartica.


Its not wrongfull arrest to arrest somebody who attacks military personell on a military instilliation. So she would not been fired. given a slight reprimand for beening abit to agressiv maybe.

ANd no cap hunter. There is no master mind behind the act. If there is then they just wasted a very good storyline and made into something not worth prinint or spending so much time on.

[IamtheRock3]

He only attack ounce they were going to shoot him and Arrest him


What you think the darts were for..Penicillin

Cap would of been tossed in a Hole untill this thing was over. And his people would be rounded up and given the speedball treatment

Cap knew the gun pulling was a sign of things to come

Plus read new Avenger. Sense issue 1 is painted Sheild as crooked.

[Jmacq1]

Geez Louise, would people -please- stop trying to apply real world legality to the Marvel Universe and much less to SHIELD? Sure, what' Cap's doing is technically illegal, as was attacking SHIELD agents. But comic-books aren't the "real world" and if you're going to apply real world legality to that instance, you have to apply it to -everything-.

Thus, there are no more superhero comics, because none of the "arrests" made by them are legal, and they almost never follow due process of law or show up to testify at trials.

I -highly- doubt Cap was going to get any sort of "fair trial" or "court martial". He was going to get stuck in a deep, dark "secret" dungeon until the whole thing blew over, and maybe not even let out then. We're not talking about a real-world legal authority here. We're talking about an organization that has been continually infiltrated and corrupted, most recently being implicated as corrupt in events Cap has had direct involvement in!

Legality isn't really the issue anyway. If you believe the law or even the government is the ultimate arbiter of "right" and "wrong" then I refer you to Nazi Germany.

THE LAW IS NOT ALWAYS RIGHT.

And even in the real world, you -can- resist the law and the government with violence. You just won't likely be successful and may very well end up riddled with bullets because of it. ;)

But we aren't Captain America either, and Marvel isn't the real world.

[Capt Hunter]

ANd no cap hunter. There is no master mind behind the act. If there is then they just wasted a very good storyline and made into something not worth prinint or spending so much time on.

In the newest issue of Wolverine... Nitro was about to give the name of his boss when Namor butted in.... IMO there is a larger conspiracy with this... We never really found out in New Avengers the person behind the Breakout Storyline.... Who has Viper working for them.... New Avengers was the beginning of an even bigger story... and I believe that we will see some answers in a few months....

The idea behind Civil War is much like what DC did with Infinite Crisis... they are changing the landscape of their shared universes... Shaking things up... Getting reader excited about things... It worked for me... Having Spider-man unmask was worth the price of admission alone... There is an anti-illuminati.... it now the question of who and why????

The Heroes of the Marvel Universe after this event will have to learn to work together again... trust is lost... and that is a hard thing to get back....

Sorry to get off topic a little..... but Captain America is the hero of the story.. no doubts... and he had every right to fight this.... The SRHA is the same as Nazism......

[Jake V]

Hill is on someones payrole... other then the United States Government... Why the hell did Nick Fury go underground like he did....
He committed war crimes when he led a strike against the Latverian government.

Captain America knows when things are going bad... its just his thing.... and to throw out another theory, Yelena Belova, is probably Agent Hill in disguise...
She turned out to be the most recent Super Adaptoid in the New Avengers annual.

Its been said by Ms. Marvel is gonna regret what she is doing in upcoming arcs.... but who knows, I could be completely off base here.....
yeah, there's a chance of that.

[Capt Hunter]

He committed war crimes when he led a strike against the Latverian government.

Whoa.... I missed that one....

She turned out to be the most recent Super Adaptoid in the New Avengers annual.

oh..... again... I missed that one also...


thanks for the info.... I am still grabbing back issues right now.... Which issues did Nick go rogue.....

I have been a DC nut for a few years... After Infinite Crisis, I felt letdown by DC.... and found Marvel to be very exciting and fun right now.... I started as a Marvel Zombie back in the 80's but fell out of sorts with Marvel during the Jemas era....

[jackolover]

This is one of the reason's I'm pro-reg. We don't know why these hero's are against the law, we all make assumptions on why they are against it but in the end we have no real idea. They never say, they just blatently defy the law and the current will of the people. There is no real reason to be anti-reg as far as I can see, and if those against it would change their tune and join up they could probably set in motion a force to police those who get access to the names of hero's. In essence they could effect more productive, and more effiecent change on Tony's side than on Cap's side.

Firstly, I apologise for replying so late.

No! Look at Frontline 5. Is it supposed to happen like this?

[jackolover]

Are you sure that technically SHIELD doesn't just consider Cap to still be an angent of SHIELD? Wasn't he one in the past? If he was insubordinate they had every right to try and detain him.

Firstly I apologise for answering so late.

Cap? This is how they would strong arm a legend? No way. Shield knew what they asked was wrong, that's why they came in with all the firearms.

[jackolover]

Yes, however that only means that Fury had a better working relationship with Cap than Hill, and gave him more slack. It doesn't necessarily mean that Cap has the ability to turn down a directive.

But really, the whole situation started when Cap raised his arm at Hill. With his shield attached to it. Which might seem like a fairly inoccuous act to us, but considering how many times the cops have shot a man going for his wallet and have it be considered justifiable, raising a known deadly weapon at the head of a paramilitary organization isn't the smartest move for keeping tempers down.

Firstly, I apologise for the late reply.

Who said Fury gave cap slack? Cap says what goes, not Fury. Hill holds no sway with cap at all, because she's just a beaurocrat. Cap would ignore her.

[jackolover]

The funny thing is that it was not SHIELD that attcked capt. it was captain america that attacked SHIELD. I was reading Civilwar #1 director's cut where the last part of the comic is a page by page desc of the scene with notes from the writters.

Now consider caps track record on how he responce in diffrent situation ( he normally use force) it would be danm stupid of hill to not have backup. So the Cape killers precense is not so unplaces as you may think.

He also gives the soldiers order's. That indicatra that he is working for them ( he has to follow orders even if he is a freelancer or get fired) And Hill gives him several oppertunity to end it peacefully. the cap is just stubborn and is basicly itching for a fight. ANd its not the finger poining that sumons the cape killer. its his words. Cap is basicly saying that he will break that law, and more imporantly he is basicly saying that he belives the superheros are above the law. That's where he stepps over the line. And yet, Hill tries to reason with him. But also show's him the consqvense of breaking the law. If you break the law then your a criminal. Thats how the law work's. Like it or not. He also treathens the cape killes when they dont follow his orders ( why should he, if he was not a SHIELD operative think he can give those soldiers any order's? can a civilian order a swat team around if he doesnt like where they are standing?)

What is her responce? "tranquliser on boys, get ready" Now she even tells him that the cape killes wont use leathal force, and its the last warning he get. And what is caps respnoce? he curses at her and calling it all insane. ( insane to be asked to follow a law? )

Then there is the attack frame where you see cap busting threw two soldiers as Hill scream's " Tranquilizers! NOW! " Now in the directors cut comic book the writter has written this about the scene


So cap attacked first, that would not stand well up in court, "yes sir. I was talking with Hill and the argument got heated so I just attack the people she had around to protect herself from me. No sire I dont think I have an anger managment problem"


Firstly, sorry for the late reply.

I can't split your quotes, so I do references to them.

"Now consider Caps" - No! Cap was dealing with his own organisation. He wouldn't be intent to violence with his own people.

"He also threatens the capekillers, (why should he?" - Well, apparently Cap is a 2 star general, so he gives orders and wants them obeyed.

"What is her response?" - No, it's insane that this lady is trying to arrest a 2 star general.

[jackolover]

Cap also has a reputation to solve problems with his fist, something he proves now. Hill did the right thing in the scene. She never say he is under arrrest or that he cant leave, he doenst even try to leave. He is the one trying to gett into a fight, she is the one trying to explain to him why the law is a good thing as well wanting the best man to convinse the hero's to reg.

She is trying to save life's there, not civilians but superhero's life. All casulites of the war does now lie on cap's shoulder becouse the law will be enforced and it is no matter how you look at it a resnebol law. The few problems with the law can be fixed by working within the system. Not from the outside.

Firstly, sorry for the late reply.

"He is the one trying to get in a fight" ? - I disagree. If Hill wanted a discussion, she would have let cap walk away. Instead, she came with a force if he disagreed.

"She is trying to save lives here"? - No, it's not reasonable. Not how Shield applies it.

[Conn Seanery]

So if I highjack a car and takes the driver for hamburger and fries at the local drive in its suddenly allright? And i never said he was a brute 100% of the time. But to be honest if I was the pilot and cap after pulling that stunt on me and then said in a jolly tone " lets go for hamburger and fries" I would not dare to say no to him. I would consider mysefl kidnapped.
So if I illegally try to capture someone just because I belong to some big, militant (possibly corrupt) organization with superior numbers, it's suddenly allright?

And while you may have been peeing your pants while Cap passed you the ketchup, I think the fact that the senator mentioning the "hamburger and fries" incident was more or less laughing about it relays the light-hearted nature of it ("I beat you fair and square, let's go get you a consolation meal") or reaction to it (if the pilot had been that negatively affected, I doubt the senator would've been so jovial). I won't discount the possibility that the pilot was initially scared, maybe even right up until he landed the plane, but after that? I mean honestly, Captain America kidnapping someone? Not even anyone important, a nobody pilot? Are you serious?

As for cap thinking that weapon would do the talking for them. Maybe for him, Hill was not interrested in attacking him. As for defusing the situation. calling her insane, barking orders as he runs the place, claiming the law is wrong and I wont follow it. Are to not ways to defuse the situation. Im not saying that Hill is blameless, but why should it ONLY be Hill's job to defuse the situation when Cap act like he does? Should he not take some responsebility? Thats the problem with a guy like cap. It seems people sides with him just becouse he is the cap. If lets say we change the whole scen and insert Iron man in the scene instead of capt. Then i bet more would say Iron man was edgy for a fight.
He said "this is insane", not "you are insane". He was talking about the situation, not Hill herself.

Cap gave them 2 warnings, after they'd all cocked their weapons and surrounded him. He only attacked after Hill said "Damn you for making me do it". To me, that's as clear as it's going to get on intent. At that point he was doing nothing unlawful, he was just disagreeing. You can call the following panel as ambiguous as you will (Cap attacking as Hill's order for them to fire is called), but Hill's the one who aggravated the situation. Cap was willing to leave the argument without a fight, Hill wasn't (unless she got what she wanted).

I look at the scene as a hero been given an order and he repondes in the worst possibol way, forcing the the argument to gett more heated and when the hero decide he has had egnough he attacks. Could Hill have dealt with it better? yes ofcourse she could, could Cap got out of the situation without fighitng, yes he had several chances to get away peacefully: he could have played along, he could have left before the debat got heated, he could have said that he needed time to think about it etc. I have seriuse doupt Hill would arrest him if cap had said he needed to think about it for a few days as the law was not in force yet.
So, he should have lied? The idea was preposterous to him, so he flat-out refused. That's Captain America.

Personally, I think both sides of that discussion were surprised at the other's reaction, and that's why it got so heavy so quick. Hill expected Cap to fall into line, Cap would've never expected someone to ask him to hunt down other heroes. Hill played it a little cooler since she had the numbers (for all the good it did her), but she did not look like she had anticipated Cap refusing to help. Not to me, anyway.

[Capt Hunter]

So if I illegally try to capture someone just because I belong to some big, militant (possibly corrupt) organization with superior numbers, it's suddenly allright?

And while you may have been peeing your pants while Cap passed you the ketchup, I think the fact that the senator mentioning the "hamburger and fries" incident was more or less laughing about it relays the light-hearted nature of it ("I beat you fair and square, let's go get you a consolation meal") or reaction to it (if the pilot had been that negatively affected, I doubt the senator would've been so jovial). I won't discount the possibility that the pilot was initially scared, maybe even right up until he landed the plane, but after that? I mean honestly, Captain America kidnapping someone? Not even anyone important, a nobody pilot? Are you serious?


He said "this is insane", not "you are insane". He was talking about the situation, not Hill herself.

Cap gave them 2 warnings, after they'd all cocked their weapons and surrounded him. He only attacked after Hill said "Damn you for making me do it". To me, that's as clear as it's going to get on intent. At that point he was doing nothing unlawful, he was just disagreeing. You can call the following panel as ambiguous as you will (Cap attacking as Hill's order for them to fire is called), but Hill's the one who aggrivated the situation. Cap was willing to leave the argument without a fight, Hill wasn't (unless she got what she wanted).


So, he should have lied? The idea was preposterous to him, so he flat-out refused. That's Captain America.

Personally, I think both sides of that discussion were surprised at the other's reaction, and that's why it got so heavy so quick. Hill expected Cap to fall into line, Cap would've never expected someone to ask him to hunt down other heroes. Hill played it a little cooler since she had the numbers (for all the good it did her), but she did not look like she had anticipated Cap refusing to help. Not to me, anyway.

Excellent Post.... you know Captain America.... kudos...

[bulbasteve]

So if I illegally try to capture someone just because I belong to some big, militant (possibly corrupt) organization with superior numbers, it's suddenly allright?


Why is it illegal? We really have no frame of reference for a fictional covert military agency, which is not even subject to U.S. law since its under the U.N. For all we know when if they captured him they may have used outstanding vigilante charges, that secret war stuff with Fury, being considered a member of SHIELD/U.S Military.

[Red Berens]

I think it's simple. Free men don't need to register. Captain America embodies the spirit of American freedom.

[Conn Seanery]

Why is it illegal? We really have no frame of reference for a fictional covert military agency, which is not even subject to U.S. law since its under the U.N. For all we know when if they captured him they may have used outstanding vigilante charges, that secret war stuff with Fury, being considered a member of SHIELD/U.S Military.
Well, I suppose the legality of the action taken could be up in the air, i'm not completely knowledgable about SHIELD's jurisdiction or if they even have any right to give Captain America orders, beside the fact that the law had not yet been passed (which is why i'm leaning toward "illegal").

While they might've been able to drum up some vigilante charges, would they have stuck? And if they did, how does that make SHIELD look? How long has Captain America been running free, even cooperating with them on numerous past occasions, why do they choose now do bring him down? It's a bit transparent, I doubt it would fly. At least not in the public eye. I've mentioned elsewhere that my theory is that one of the leaders will have to martyr themselves to get a clear victory, and successfully capturing Captain America at that point would've shot the pro-reg side in the foot before they'd even stood up, as far as i'm concerned.

[Morw]

First of sorry about the late reply, I live in Norway and si probebly i bed for the night when most of you get off work.

secondly: to split quotes is easy, just copy and past the begins and end code for qute into where ever you want to splitt it.

Now to the subject :

1. no I know the darts where not pencilie, ( well after caps round on the city two days before and his fear of needles you dont know :P ) but I do know they where not bullets and would not have killed him if they hitt him.

2. Captain america is probebly the only one who could, with some small measure, managed to get a fair trail. All he has to do is gett arrested on national TV, with his lawer present. He is to famouse to try to hide away then. Now how would he managed that stunt. He would "agre" with hill just to get out of the helicarrier and then hold a press conferranse and have himself arrested. And if he was smart then he would have done that.

3. As for the Nitro etc. Im sure he has some backmen etc. but he didnt force speedball to find him or to attack him Speedball set the whole thing loose by acting irresponsebol. Beside if there is one great conspiresy going on then the law wil be nulled and we are back at square one with the exemption for spierman. And all this just to shake up spiderman?

4. Well lets say you discover that CIA has become corrupt and you have been working close with them as an freelance agent. Then they give you an assignemt you dont want to do so you gett into arguing. The only problem is that the argument is inside a CIA military facility and the person your arguing with is the highest ranking officer on the place. If the highest ranking officer then gives you an order to stand down and you dont do that then you are in trouble. Not just right there and then. but lawfully. Becouse there is no law that says that you can break the law as loong as somebody else breaks it to.

5. He might be a 2 star general but not over shield. or to illustrate. Lets say a 2-star's Irani general is on visit in the USA and gets noticed and then tried arrested. Does he have the right to order the USA officers around just becouse of his rank? Cap would know this. His rank dont mean anything in there and should not get supprised as he is standing infront of the highest ranking officers on SHIELD at that momant and he knows she outranks him.

6. If hill had invited Cap into his office offered him cookies and milk while asking him then the next frame would be hill beatne up blue and green and spend the rest of the Civil war in a coma. If you know there is a chance that he might say no then you have to have a back-up becpouse he wont listen once he made up his mind and he will push his view on you and if you dont agree then its "clumbering time."

7. Intentianaly kidnapped the pilot no, But him beeing cap and the pilot beeing a "nobody" you have to wonder if that "nobody" would have the guts to say " sorry captain I'll stay with the plane. I dont like it when crazy people decide to use my place as a danm surf board!" After all there was gunfireing just before the cap landed on the jet. As for the senators story. He might think its funny just becouse he did not know the pilot was dead scared and just relived when he was found.

8. Cap is not part of SHIELD he has no right to give them orders or warnings. His jobb ther would be to diffuse the sitiation. Not proveke them, Yes he is saying the sitation is insane, and his Danm you to Hell for thise is just as much telling Hill what cap is about to do, Her answear can just as easy be danm you for forceing me to defend myself against you when I was hoping you would work with us. And beside Hill had yet to actully give the order and they could still talk.

9. Where does cap show any urge to leave? He don't. He dont say "I'm leaving" or anything close to this. Infact he choose to stay, to face her. So the point of him beeing to leave fighitng out of it is a moot point. (infact I think we booth can agree that they booth secretly wanted to fight from the begining of. The way they two argue you should wonder if they where married)

10. Cap has lied before to get a stratigic advantage. He did so with Ironman, just so he could place the device on him. He has worked undercover before and will probebly do it again. A wise warrior knows when to play along and when to fight. The whole scene just again show me that cap is a stronge warrior but not very wise.

11. As for the last post of beeing shocked at the others reaction, yes I totaly agree. Of all heros in Mu I can understand why you would think cap would be on the pro side. Since he basicly have been threw the program and that was what shaped him into what he is today.

12. Free men do infact need to registrat if not then they cannot vote. And to giove your vote on who is goping to run the contry is the ultimate act of freedome in todays sosiaty. So registration is not against freedome. Heck according to myth you are registrated in heaven to in the great book. Do you think God is evil just becouse he registrated you? ( you dont need to answear that one)

13. First of they never mention arrest, so we dont know what would have happend if cap had just said "I'm leaving" the next image might have been Hill give the order "Let him leave." speculating on that would be usless, lets rather argue about what we know of the scene. As for the matyr dome. its possibol but I dont think it will happen. Marvel need booth leaders alive. I think cap will finaly tell IM about the corruption in SHIELD and IR will managed to wrestle the law away from SHIELD.


It would have been so danm easy if those two had just satt down and talked for a couple of hours while beeing unable to fight. Heck the sides should tie them down and sitt them in a empty room so the only thing they could do was talk. might resolve the whole conflict.

The major problem with the law is SHIELD, im well awear of that. But I dont want to blame SHIELD for every thing, just the part they acctually have done wrong. In the Cap/SHIELD scene they where booth wrong, and then it would be wrong to only blame SHIELD. I think we can agree to that?

[IamtheRock3]

. no I know the darts where not pencilie, ( well after caps round on the city two days before and his fear of needles you dont know :P ) but I do know they where not bullets and would not have killed him if they hitt him.

Wont kill him but goes against your she wasnt trying to Arrest him argument

2. Captain america is probebly the only one who could, with some small measure, managed to get a fair trail. All he has to do is gett arrested on national TV, with his lawer present. He is to famouse to try to hide away then. Now how would he managed that stunt. He would "agre" with hill just to get out of the helicarrier and then hold a press conferranse and have himself arrested. And if he was smart then he would have done that.

That to shady for Cap. He be backstabber. Also The guns were Drawn after he complain. Hill wouldnt by it if he made an about Face in a differnt direction

3. As for the Nitro etc. Im sure he has some backmen etc. but he didnt force speedball to find him or to attack him Speedball set the whole thing loose by acting irresponsebol. Beside if there is one great conspiresy going on then the law wil be nulled and we are back at square one with the exemption for spierman. And all this just to shake up spiderman?

Well there enough to suggest in wolverine this was plan. It doesn help speedball case, doesnt completly let him loose but explain why he wasnt aware of the danger he was in and he was set up. Be Equlvant to them setting up a cops in with a mugger running into a bank. The cops figure one mugger so goes in somewhat recklessly. Mugger has a bomb and blows up the bank. Cops are screwed..but if it turn out the Goverment Gave the mugger a bomb and told them to get them to chase them in a bank..well helps the cops case

4. Well lets say you discover that CIA has become corrupt and you have been working close with them as an freelance agent. Then they give you an assignemt you dont want to do so you gett into arguing. The only problem is that the argument is inside a CIA military facility and the person your arguing with is the highest ranking officer on the place. If the highest ranking officer then gives you an order to stand down and you dont do that then you are in trouble. Not just right there and then. but lawfully. Becouse there is no law that says that you can break the law as loong as somebody else breaks it to.

Sometime you got to break the law, if it avoids you getting stuck in some hole somehwere

5. He might be a 2 star general but not over shield. or to illustrate. Lets say a 2-star's Irani general is on visit in the USA and gets noticed and then tried arrested. Does he have the right to order the USA officers around just becouse of his rank? Cap would know this. His rank dont mean anything in there and should not get supprised as he is standing infront of the highest ranking officers on SHIELD at that momant and he knows she outranks him.

6. If hill had invited Cap into his office offered him cookies and milk while asking him then the next frame would be hill beatne up blue and green and spend the rest of the Civil war in a coma. If you know there is a chance that he might say no then you have to have a back-up becpouse he wont listen once he made up his mind and he will push his view on you and if you dont agree then its "clumbering time."

Ok That just wrong. Most of those situiation The Pro side attack first or he was trying to escape. Hill not just going to beat on Hill unprovoke. People use the Iron man example

But I see it as This. IF I was Cap. Iron man just shot 2 of my guys, knocking them out, Guns around me, And their Giant Robots who called (to put things in perspective) THE IMATHEROCK BEAT DOWN CREW.

Well I may guess It wont be a situation. "Well Iron man respectivly disagree. So ummm just being going now. No need to toss by but in a negative Zone never to be seen again"

Iron man- Sure Chap. Gentlemen drop your guns, I gave a good argument but if he doesnt want to Join I respect your decesion

No it would it With a Iron boot in my butt. So I am going get me and my crew out there as quick as possible. Now did Cap act a bit reckless ..oh yes. But both sides did that

7. Intentianaly kidnapped the pilot no, But him beeing cap and the pilot beeing a "nobody" you have to wonder if that "nobody" would have the guts to say " sorry captain I'll stay with the plane. I dont like it when crazy people decide to use my place as a danm surf board!" After all there was gunfireing just before the cap landed on the jet. As for the senators story. He might think its funny just becouse he did not know the pilot was dead scared and just relived when he was found.

Well the fact the guy seem cool with here at the end seem to dismiss

8. Cap is not part of SHIELD he has no right to give them orders or warnings. His jobb ther would be to diffuse the sitiation. Not proveke them, Yes he is saying the sitation is insane, and his Danm you to Hell for thise is just as much telling Hill what cap is about to do, Her answear can just as easy be danm you for forceing me to defend myself against you when I was hoping you would work with us. And beside Hill had yet to actully give the order and they could still talk.

The warning was fair. He basicly said not going to let you shoot me. It wasnt an order

9. Where does cap show any urge to leave? He don't. He dont say "I'm leaving" or anything close to this. Infact he choose to stay, to face her. So the point of him beeing to leave fighitng out of it is a moot point. (infact I think we booth can agree that they booth secretly wanted to fight from the begining of. The way they two argue you should wonder if they where married)

Don't think Cap wanted a Physical Fight with Shield men. He had nothing against them

10. Cap has lied before to get a stratigic advantage. He did so with Ironman, just so he could place the device on him. He has worked undercover before and will probebly do it again. A wise warrior knows when to play along and when to fight. The whole scene just again show me that cap is a stronge warrior but not very wise.

Again the guns only were Drawn ounce he Disagreed. So saying "HAHAHAH just kidding with you Hill. Let me and you beat up on the young guns and have some beer"

Would not be convincing. Dont think when he disagree he was expecting guns to be drawn then he was like "WOE is this how it going to go down..F THIS"

11. As for the last post of beeing shocked at the others reaction, yes I totaly agree. Of all heros in Mu I can understand why you would think cap would be on the pro side. Since he basicly have been threw the program and that was what shaped him into what he is today.

That was before New Avenger shapped Shield to be Evil. And it showed the goverment tried to off him. Cap went againt the goverment a bunch of times

12. Free men do infact need to registrat if not then they cannot vote. And to giove your vote on who is goping to run the contry is the ultimate act of freedome in todays sosiaty. So registration is not against freedome. Heck according to myth you are registrated in heaven to in the great book. Do you think God is evil just becouse he registrated you? ( you dont need to answear that one)

ohhhh NOT AGAINST the registration. Against how it done. So many holes it.
Also again trusy OUR govement
DONT trust MARVEL Goverment who has a Tedecy to build Giant robots to hunt down mutants.

13. First of they never mention arrest, so we dont know what would have happend if cap had just said "I'm leaving" the next image might have been Hill give the order "Let him leave." speculating on that would be usless, lets rather argue about what we know of the scene. As for the matyr dome. its possibol but I dont think it will happen. Marvel need booth leaders alive. I think cap will finaly tell IM about the corruption in SHIELD and IR will managed to wrestle the law away from SHIELD.

Again take you to point 1. Guns With Tranq Darts.

Tranq Darts design to tranquilize people. That in turn cause people to stop moving, thus loses the abilty to leave. So dont think he could leave

It would have been so danm easy if those two had just satt down and talked for a couple of hours while beeing unable to fight. Heck the sides should tie them down and sitt them in a empty room so the only thing they could do was talk. might resolve the whole conflict.

The major problem with the law is SHIELD, im well awear of that. But I dont want to blame SHIELD for every thing, just the part they acctually have done wrong. In the Cap/SHIELD scene they where booth wrong, and then it would be wrong to only blame SHIELD. I think we can agree to that?


Oh think they both would of handle it

But I was Cap I would of Ran during that Scene becuase really dont think he be seen for a while if he didnt. and THEN went to Tony or someone and told them what happen, went to congress, and then went to the news. and got arrested


Of course I do think Cap is one of the FEW people with the profile to pull that.

Both mess up
Just think Shield being bigger asses

Registration is a SIMPLE idea...perfect in a simplicy.

Let they found some way to screw it up

[XPac]

To me, Jessica Jones treatment in NA showed exactly why someone wouldn't wnat to register, with Wonderman's treatment verifying it.

Jeissica made it clear that she's not interested in being a superhero. And Tony's response is basically we'll deal with that issue later AFTER you register.

Combine that with the revelation Simon got that the registration is in fact a DRAFT (something we all should have suspected it was anyways), and you can plainly see the problem.

You have Hill in charge, a woman that in NA showed she'll outright murder innocent people to achieve her mission. And you've got a mandatory draft that basically forces any hero to sign it to become SHIELD agents under her command anytime she feels like it.

The bill passed far too quickly. Maybe if they had taken time to hammer it out and possibly make some concesions (like removing the bit about the draft, and not having a murderer like Hill be in charge) then perhaps the heroes wouldn't be so reluctent to sign on. But the way the pro-side handled the situation all but guranteed that people would be against it.

[FBHthelizardmage]

How can anyone say that Hill did not insight the situation?

Cap disagrees with her. He says it's not a good idea, and he doesn't want to have to hunt down his friends. He also says superheros should stay above politics, and that washington shouldn't say who were the supervillains.

At which point, rather than say, yell at him, tell him to go cool off, heck, even pull rank on him, she pops up about a platoon of heavily armed special forces mooks to point guns at him, they all have their guns cocked and ready.

Cap still doesn't explode into instant action against this obvious threat, and infact gives to warnings, saying that Hill's actions are insane. (which quite frankly they are) and warns them to stand down. (which is pretty reasonable frankly, I mean, if your arguing politics with someone you must consider a near equal, and they suddenly pop up gun mooks I'd tell them to stand down to)

Hill and her minions have no intention of standing down however, so Cap either attacks or is attacked. By this point it doesn't honestly seem to matter, they were obviously a threat to him, it was pretty blatantly self defence against a woman who is either playing her own agenda or has gone totally insane.

[FBHthelizardmage]

Added to that, if Hill is in charge of the program, then I wouldn't want to be registered. I mean, her responce to you having qualms about some goverment mission is going to be "Take him down boys!"

[Markavian]

:eek: [QUOTE=Conn Seanery]So if I illegally try to capture someone just because I belong to some big, militant (possibly corrupt) organization with superior numbers, it's suddenly allright?

And while you may have been peeing your pants while Cap passed you the ketchup, I think the fact that the senator mentioning the "hamburger and fries" incident was more or less laughing about it relays the light-hearted nature of it ("I beat you fair and square, let's go get you a consolation meal") or reaction to it (if the pilot had been that negatively affected, I doubt the senator would've been so jovial). I won't discount the possibility that the pilot was initially scared, maybe even right up until he landed the plane, but after that? I mean honestly, Captain America kidnapping someone? Not even anyone important, a nobody pilot? Are you serious?


He said "this is insane", not "you are insane". He was talking about the situation, not Hill herself.

Cap gave them 2 warnings, after they'd all cocked their weapons and surrounded him. He only attacked after Hill said "Damn you for making me do it". To me, that's as clear as it's going to get on intent. At that point he was doing nothing unlawful, he was just disagreeing. You can call the following panel as ambiguous as you will (Cap attacking as Hill's order for them to fire is called), but Hill's the one who aggravated the situation. Cap was willing to leave the argument without a fight, Hill wasn't (unless she got what she wanted).


So, he should have lied? The idea was preposterous to him, so he flat-out refused. That's Captain America.

Personally, I think both sides of that discussion were surprised at the other's reaction, and that's why it got so heavy so quick. Hill expected Cap to fall into line, Cap would've never expected someone to ask him to hunt down other heroes. Hill played it a little cooler since she had the numbers (for all the good it did her), but she did not look like she had anticipated Cap refusing to help. Not to me, anyway.[/QUOTE Captain America has often been a Covert Operative in the past on many occasions. And under law the Goverment has the right to Rein in Said Operatives if they Go Rouge. The Goverment has wide latitude to do so.Even though I am 100% Pro Regestration I think what was done to Cap in CW 1 Sucked,However it Does not Give him free reign to do what he did in CW 2 or other issues.Where this goes we will have to see of course.If Hill had approched Cap differently she coul.d have at least ensured his neautrallity maybe even got him to sign on as an Advisor. Hills actions as much as Stamford started Civil war....

[Morw]

Wont kill him but goes against your she wasnt trying to Arrest him argument

So if an officer of the law defends himself against an assult he is trying to arrest the person? the fire those tranq. darts becouse he attacks. So no it does not go agaisnt my argument of her arresting him. If he had been put down then he would have been arrested, onnthe charge of assulting a goverment emply. But that would have been becouse that what he was doing.

That to shady for Cap. He be backstabber. Also The guns were Drawn after he complain. Hill wouldnt by it if he made an about Face in a differnt direction
Even if the guns where drawn, if he had jouin the program ( even if it was a frame) then those guns would have bveen holstered. As for to shady for cap? He shook hanhds with Ironman and gave him 5 min to explain his side but used that whole apperance to put a divice to short circut Ironman armour. Nothing is to shade for Cap after that. he just lied to a close freind who wanted to talk and knew he could not pick up the cell phone to call him. So please dont say that Cap wont play the " play along card" when he has been proven to do so.

Well there enough to suggest in wolverine this was plan. It doesn help speedball case, doesnt completly let him loose but explain why he wasnt aware of the danger he was in and he was set up. Be Equlvant to them setting up a cops in with a mugger running into a bank. The cops figure one mugger so goes in somewhat recklessly. Mugger has a bomb and blows up the bank. Cops are screwed..but if it turn out the Goverment Gave the mugger a bomb and told them to get them to chase them in a bank..well helps the cops case

Even if it helps the speedball case, the whole thing just proves whyn the law is needed.If the bad guys can provoke the heros into fighting in populkated areas and cause sever damage, not only to buldings but also to the civilian population then they need basic cop training. You dont engande in a fire fight near innocent civilian unless you have to. ANd they didnt had to arrest Nirto there and then. they could have followed him to a less populated area. Cops know thise, thats whyn the often hang back on car chases. simply becouse it would bed to dangerouse for the genreal public to endgade in a hig speed chace. And to you example. It only helps the cops chace if the cops did nothing to provoke the bomber's action. It simply doesnt matter where the bomb came from if the person trying to defuse the situation decide to push the trigger. Speedball did just that.

Sometime you got to break the law, if it avoids you getting stuck in some hole somehwere
Yes I agree, but if a small white lie would keep you out of thart hole and give you a seriuse chance to change the law then you would be stupid to not do so. ANd Cap has been known to devic de people to get his will, I again point to caps giving Iron man " 5 min to explain his side" (I ntion that simply becouse it the latest profe of cap using decite to get his way)

Ok That just wrong. Most of those situiation The Pro side attack first or he was trying to escape. Hill not just going to beat on Hill unprovoke. People use the Iron man example

But I see it as This. IF I was Cap. Iron man just shot 2 of my guys, knocking them out, Guns around me, And their Giant Robots who called (to put things in perspective) THE IMATHEROCK BEAT DOWN CREW.

Well I may guess It wont be a situation. "Well Iron man respectivly disagree. So ummm just being going now. No need to toss by but in a negative Zone never to be seen again"

Iron man- Sure Chap. Gentlemen drop your guns, I gave a good argument but if he doesnt want to Join I respect your decesion

No it would it With a Iron boot in my butt. So I am going get me and my crew out there as quick as possible. Now did Cap act a bit reckless ..oh yes. But both sides did that


If surrendewre by a a superior force and the superior force want to negotiate, not a surrendcer but just negotiate, then your a danm fool if you provke them into attack. 5 min may have given those 2 unconisue people ime to awaken. If it would have taken 6 minutes to awken them then you would have no problem getting that last miute becouse they are more willing to talk then fight. Sorry, it's just yet another example of cap lacking knowledge of how to fight a war. The guy is an amature, atleasdt how the protray him now. And again Iron did not say "your all under arrest" heck if cap after those five min had said " we need to think about it, you have given something to discuss now" then I bet iron man would have allowed them free pass. It does not matter for Ironman and his side if they have to set the trapp twice, they got the reasores for it. Ironman is not after killing or attacking the other side. If you follow the dialog then you see that he want them to think it over. Thery would rather have a discussion about it then a brawl. the anrti side on the other hand just want to brawl.


The warning was fair. He basicly said not going to let you shoot me. It wasnt an order

The warning was not fair as he is on a SHIELD insitaltion and has no SHIELD rank. He cannot give order or make threath to their armed personell, Even if he is a Hero. beeing a Hero does not givce you extra rights. People seem top forget that part.

Don't think Cap wanted a Physical Fight with Shield men. He had nothing against them
If he didnt want a physical fight with them then why didnt he say "im leaving" ? If I want to avoide a fight then Im voletay leave the seen. You wont belive how many times that has saved me from a fight. Heck even a drunk m,an understands it. So no, Cap wanted that fight. He would have tried to leave without starting a fight if he didnt. Remeber Hill never said he cant leave.

That was before New Avenger shapped Shield to be Evil. And it showed the goverment tried to off him. Cap went againt the goverment a bunch of times

You seem to fail to see the point. The question is not how many times Cap has gone against the goverment but how Hill thought cap would react to give superhero's proper trainning and proper protection. Its how she pervice him cap and his reaction and how wrong she did. As well has Caps way of preciving the sitation and what she would be willing to do. It has nothing to do with what he at the time thinks but what the others think the other would do. That was what I was answearing.

Tranq Darts design to tranquilize people. That in turn cause people to stop moving, thus loses the abilty to leave. So dont think he could leave
well he had just attacked them what should they do? assult him with harsh words while he was beating them up? Come on. He was goiven a choise to join them, turned it down and stared to edge for the fight, Hill was stupid egnough to give him that fight. cap was wronjg and hill was wrong. But Hill would have won the chace in the coourt of law simply becouse Cap attacked first.

But to the chase. im not arguing the SHIELD is blameless, but rather that NONE of them are blameless. ANd that captain america is probebly way out of charter. As he is supposed to be thise wiz on how to conduct warefare. Sop we do basicly agree. If you can agree that SHIELD and Hill does not have trhe full blame for what happend then I would agree that Cap is not 100% to blame for what happend lets agree on a 50/50 % blame on booth side.

[Conn Seanery]

2. Captain america is probebly the only one who could, with some small measure, managed to get a fair trail. He would "agre" with hill just to get out of the helicarrier and then hold a press conferranse and have himself arrested. And if he was smart then he would have done that.
I don't think he would lie like that. I could maybe imagine him saying something like "I'll have to bring this issue to the other Avengers and let them choose for themselves, but i'll be urging them to refuse." He wouldn't pretend to agree.

Keep in mind that when he initially disagreed with Hill they were still talking without any implied threats. Can you honestly imagine Cap, once he was threatened, all of a sudden backing down and saying "Okay, you're right" just to get off the heli-carrier?

4. Well lets say you discover that CIA has become corrupt and you have been working close with them as an freelance agent. Then they give you an assignemt you dont want to do so you gett into arguing. The only problem is that the argument is inside a CIA military facility and the person your arguing with is the highest ranking officer on the place. If the highest ranking officer then gives you an order to stand down and you dont do that then you are in trouble. Becouse there is no law that says that you can break the law as loong as somebody else breaks it to.
Well of course i'd comply. I'm me, capable of nothing spectacular. Against those numbers, no matter how good I thought I was, odds are it's a futile action with no possible good end result for me. But If I were able to handle myself as well as Captain America can, you can bet for damn sure i'd resist.

But for this hypothetical to sync up properly with what happened in CW #1 you have to take out the "stand down" order. At no point did Hill order Cap to stand down, people just acted. In any scenario you cook up having Cap surrender, you'd have to make an adjustment to Hill's behavior as well or it just doesn't work. Like I said earlier, she's the one who aggravated the situation.

6. If hill had invited Cap into his office offered him cookies and milk while asking him then the next frame would be hill beatne up blue and green and spend the rest of the Civil war in a coma. If you know there is a chance that he might say no then you have to have a back-up becpouse he wont listen once he made up his mind and he will push his view on you and if you dont agree then its "clumbering time."
This is the "arrogant & brutish" Captain America you were talking about earlier, I assume? Sorry, but I very much doubt that would ever happen. If she pulled a gun, maybe then he'd do what you were saying. He'd never fly off the handle like that without being/feeling threatened.

7. But him being cap and the pilot being a "nobody" you have to wonder if that "nobody" would have the guts to say " sorry captain I'll stay with the plane. I dont like it when crazy people decide to use my place as a danm surf board!" After all there was gunfireing just before the cap landed on the jet. As for the senators story. He might think its funny just becouse he did not know the pilot was dead scared and just relived when he was found.
I think you're taking farther leaps for your own interpretation of that situation than I am with mine.

8. Cap is not part of SHIELD he has no right to give them orders or warnings. His jobb ther would be to diffuse the sitiation. Not proveke them, Yes he is saying the sitation is insane, and his Danm you to Hell for thise is just as much telling Hill what cap is about to do, Her answear can just as easy be danm you for forceing me to defend myself against you when I was hoping you would work with us. And beside Hill had yet to actully give the order and they could still talk.
Yes, with dozens of guards all pointing their weapons at him. I'm sorry, but you're too hell bent on seeing Cap surrender here and it's clouding your judgment, IMO. You can't have it both ways, if Cap isn't a part of SHIELD he's also not under any obligation to take orders from them or submit to them either. It's also not his job to diffuse the tension, he's not responsible for it. Hill's the one responsible for the situation, she was too gung-ho and she paid the price.

Cap's "Damn you to Hell for this" is a little more open for interpretation than Hill's "Damn you to Hell for making me do this". Hers is specifically about the situation where she feels she needs to capture Cap, his could be anything from commentary on the soldiers surrounding him to a precursor before an attack. Since it's Cap, i'm leaning toward the commentary thing.

9. Where does cap show any urge to leave? He don't. He dont say "I'm leaving" or anything close to this. Infact he choose to stay, to face her. So the point of him beeing to leave fighitng out of it is a moot point. (infact I think we booth can agree that they booth secretly wanted to fight from the begining of. The way they two argue you should wonder if they where married)
No, i'm afraid we do not agree. Despite the fact that Hill hasn't done much in previous encounters to earn Cap's trust, him even showing up there is a sign of good faith on his part. If he's arrived of his own free will he should be able to leave of his own free will. Hill never gave him a chance, so he took it.

If i'm Captain America, i'm being surrounded, guns loaded and pointing at me, and Hill hasn't made any official charges yet hints that i'm forcing her to act, call me crazy, but I don't think it's too big of a stretch of the imagination to think there's a fight coming.

10. Cap has lied before to get a stratigic advantage. He did so with Ironman, just so he could place the device on him. He has worked undercover before and will probebly do it again. A wise warrior knows when to play along and when to fight. The whole scene just again show me that cap is a stronge warrior but not very wise.
Well, since you're so big on wildly unlikely interpretations to support your own theories, how do you like this one: When he said "You've got 5 minutes", he meant it in the "You've got 5 minutes of consciousness left while I kick your ass" way. Or even an "I'm scambling your suit's systems for 5 minutes" way.

Anyway, the difference in those situations are that in CW #1, Cap thought he was where he was for a specific reason, ended up being surrounded, given no chance to leave, and was "offered" no choice but to comply. In CW #3, Cap thought he was where he was for a specific reason, ended up being surrounded, given no chance to leave, and "offered" no choice but to comply. Hey, wait a second...

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, you get a shield in the face.

12. Free men do infact need to registrat if not then they cannot vote. And to giove your vote on who is goping to run the contry is the ultimate act of freedome in todays sosiaty. So registration is not against freedome. Heck according to myth you are registrated in heaven to in the great book. Do you think God is evil just becouse he registrated you? ( you dont need to answear that one)
So if I didn't vote for God, does that mean I have to believe in the Bible's message? Or can I just try to be a good person based on the morals, innate or not, i've come to know through my upbringing and life experiences?

13. First of they never mention arrest, so we dont know what would have happend if cap had just said "I'm leaving" the next image might have been Hill give the order "Let him leave." speculating on that would be usless, lets rather argue about what we know of the scene.
That's fine, but what I know about the scene is that he wasn't given a chance to leave. Given that chance, I can't imagine anything that would prevent him from leaving peacefully.

It would have been so danm easy if those two had just satt down and talked for a couple of hours while beeing unable to fight. Heck the sides should tie them down and sitt them in a empty room so the only thing they could do was talk. might resolve the whole conflict.
Not without taking apart the SHRA and changing it enough so as to appease both sides, besides the fact that neither of them had the authority to do so.

The major problem with the law is SHIELD, im well awear of that. But I dont want to blame SHIELD for every thing, just the part they acctually have done wrong. In the Cap/SHIELD scene they where booth wrong, and then it would be wrong to only blame SHIELD. I think we can agree to that?
Nope. I don't blame SHIELD as being a major problem with the law (leaving the possibility of corruption aside), I blame SHIELD for escalating the tension between them and Captain America before the law was even passed.

Look at it this way...if Hill was in the Avengers tower and disagreed with Captain America, would Cap have refused to let her leave? Brought out the other Avengers once the conversation got heated and surrounded her? No.

[Conn Seanery]

Captain America has often been a Covert Operative in the past on many occasions. And under law the Goverment has the right to Rein in Said Operatives if they Go Rouge. The Goverment has wide latitude to do so.
Even if they're no longer an official operative? Regardless of that, I conceded in the post following the one you quoted that I wasn't completely up on whether or not SHIELD arresting Captain America was legal or not. I was leaning toward not because of Hill's actions, which may or may not have led to an arrest (she didn't exactly read him his rights or anything).

[Markavian]

Even if they're no longer an official operative? Regardless of that, I conceded in the post following the one you quoted that I wasn't completely up on whether or not SHIELD arresting Captain America was legal or not. I was leaning toward not because of Hill's actions, which may or may not have led to an arrest (she didn't exactly read him his rights or anything).
They can detain or interogate any Former Agent at their descretion. But they are expected to Treat them with dignity and respect unless they are proven hostile or a traitor or some such.Now Cap wasnt either . But Hill pushed or set him up into becoming "Hostile" ..Maybe she has been waiting for this oppurtunity to take down an ally of Nick Fury cant say. But as I said before Cap should have gone to his fellow Avengers and explained what happened.. I am sure Tony would have gone to the wall for him ..but instead he hid and fled.. And we get to enjoy Civil War :):)

[Subotai]

I am sure Tony would have gone to the wall for him.

Well, I'm not so sure about that.

[IamtheRock3]

So if an officer of the law defends himself against an assult he is trying to arrest the person? the fire those tranq. darts becouse he attacks. So no it does not go agaisnt my argument of her arresting him. If he had been put down then he would have been arrested, onnthe charge of assulting a goverment emply. But that would have been becouse that what he was doing.


Even if the guns where drawn, if he had jouin the program ( even if it was a frame) then those guns would have bveen holstered. As for to shady for cap? He shook hanhds with Ironman and gave him 5 min to explain his side but used that whole apperance to put a divice to short circut Ironman armour. Nothing is to shade for Cap after that. he just lied to a close freind who wanted to talk and knew he could not pick up the cell phone to call him. So please dont say that Cap wont play the " play along card" when he has been proven to do so.



Even if it helps the speedball case, the whole thing just proves whyn the law is needed.If the bad guys can provoke the heros into fighting in populkated areas and cause sever damage, not only to buldings but also to the civilian population then they need basic cop training. You dont engande in a fire fight near innocent civilian unless you have to. ANd they didnt had to arrest Nirto there and then. they could have followed him to a less populated area. Cops know thise, thats whyn the often hang back on car chases. simply becouse it would bed to dangerouse for the genreal public to endgade in a hig speed chace. And to you example. It only helps the cops chace if the cops did nothing to provoke the bomber's action. It simply doesnt matter where the bomb came from if the person trying to defuse the situation decide to push the trigger. Speedball did just that.


Yes I agree, but if a small white lie would keep you out of thart hole and give you a seriuse chance to change the law then you would be stupid to not do so. ANd Cap has been known to devic de people to get his will, I again point to caps giving Iron man " 5 min to explain his side" (I ntion that simply becouse it the latest profe of cap using decite to get his way)



If surrendewre by a a superior force and the superior force want to negotiate, not a surrendcer but just negotiate, then your a danm fool if you provke them into attack. 5 min may have given those 2 unconisue people ime to awaken. If it would have taken 6 minutes to awken them then you would have no problem getting that last miute becouse they are more willing to talk then fight. Sorry, it's just yet another example of cap lacking knowledge of how to fight a war. The guy is an amature, atleasdt how the protray him now. And again Iron did not say "your all under arrest" heck if cap after those five min had said " we need to think about it, you have given something to discuss now" then I bet iron man would have allowed them free pass. It does not matter for Ironman and his side if they have to set the trapp twice, they got the reasores for it. Ironman is not after killing or attacking the other side. If you follow the dialog then you see that he want them to think it over. Thery would rather have a discussion about it then a brawl. the anrti side on the other hand just want to brawl.




The warning was not fair as he is on a SHIELD insitaltion and has no SHIELD rank. He cannot give order or make threath to their armed personell, Even if he is a Hero. beeing a Hero does not givce you extra rights. People seem top forget that part.


If he didnt want a physical fight with them then why didnt he say "im leaving" ? If I want to avoide a fight then Im voletay leave the seen. You wont belive how many times that has saved me from a fight. Heck even a drunk m,an understands it. So no, Cap wanted that fight. He would have tried to leave without starting a fight if he didnt. Remeber Hill never said he cant leave.



You seem to fail to see the point. The question is not how many times Cap has gone against the goverment but how Hill thought cap would react to give superhero's proper trainning and proper protection. Its how she pervice him cap and his reaction and how wrong she did. As well has Caps way of preciving the sitation and what she would be willing to do. It has nothing to do with what he at the time thinks but what the others think the other would do. That was what I was answearing.


well he had just attacked them what should they do? assult him with harsh words while he was beating them up? Come on. He was goiven a choise to join them, turned it down and stared to edge for the fight, Hill was stupid egnough to give him that fight. cap was wronjg and hill was wrong. But Hill would have won the chace in the coourt of law simply becouse Cap attacked first.

But to the chase. im not arguing the SHIELD is blameless, but rather that NONE of them are blameless. ANd that captain america is probebly way out of charter. As he is supposed to be thise wiz on how to conduct warefare. Sop we do basicly agree. If you can agree that SHIELD and Hill does not have trhe full blame for what happend then I would agree that Cap is not 100% to blame for what happend lets agree on a 50/50 % blame on booth side.


thing You forgeting Hills a bitch..but not an idiot

Cap only had guns drawn on Him when he disagree, if he suddeny said "OH WHAT YOU SAID MAKES PERFECT SENSE" She wouldnt buy it

Iron man didnt say Under Arrest

But between me and you. Could Cap walk away from that if he didnt fight his way out of it. I think not.

It either agree with him or NEGATIVE ZONE

If Iron man REALLY wanted a discussion it saner ways to get in contact with Cap beside GUNS sorround him him and CAPE KILLERS (why in gods name they name it that)

either or makes you jump

Hill never said he could leave..it those exact words but you can see how the guns pointed at him may Lead one to ASSUME leaving may in some small change not be an option

[Morw]

Lets see here.

When it comes to Cap surrender then it all comes to how he does it. He can do it stupid and say " I surrender now let of the helicarrier" wicth Hill would imidatly understand is a fraud. But even then she is obligate to play along. If she dont then its her job on the line. But if cap whenthey where not arguing had said something in the line of" well the law isnt passed yet and I have to think of it. Its simply a to big dissision to take right now. besides I want to hear what the others have to say on the matter. " Then Hill would most likly been slighty annoyed but let him go. Simply becouse he gave her almost what she wanted and the law isnt passed yet so one day more would not be that much a set back. My guess would be " you got one day to think about it"
the result : no fighting, he could get hold of the others and discussed it.

At the time of when the cape killers emerges his only option to do it peacefully is to surrender or simply calmly ask her " am I under arrest?" If he was not then he could have said " then Im leaving" end of debate. If that had happend then Hill would not have opend fire simply becouse he was not under arrest, had not done anything illegal other then voice his opion etc. And again if she attacked him then it would be her job on the line.

As for my leap of conlution: I dont conclude anything I offer another version of the same incident. People her are so danmed on making everything black and white where Cap is the hero who never does anything wrong and everybody likes him. If that was the case then he would not have been shoot at on the helicrafter. ANd to be totaly honest, if somebody smashes in the copit one a moving airplane and starts to give order then I would not be making any big leap in conclusion to say that pilot might be in shock. Its's not what they trainn you on in pilot school.

As for Hill never give him a chance to leave, he never asked. Sometimes asking for a thing prevents you from having to fight for the same thing.

And despite what you may think. I'm not helbendt on put all the blame on Cap, Im trying to get the point over that cap is just as much to blame as Hill. That they are both gulity in making it spiral out of controle. They booth have to big ego to try to do it the humble way. That is the whole problem.

I have no problem saying that Hill might have hoped for cap to do just what they did, but I honestly dont think so. Simply becouse of the last frame with her in. She doesnt look happy that cap attacked, and that last sentance is spoken to herself " You idiot. We were trying to save life" for me that indicate that Hill dont want to hunt heros but she will do as she is ordered to and her try to make it as painless as possibol just dived out the window.

[Donald Stone]

I have to say, seems to me Morw read a different comic than I did, cause he see's it a lot differently than I do.

[Weirdopky]

Ok this Hill woman is pissin' me off. If Nick Fury were around, he'd know what to do. Cap would work with him to fix this mess, and Fury could take back control of SHIELD. But does anyone know where the guy is? Damn, where are you man, we need you to help!!!


-Weirdopky

[Jake V]

Ok this Hill woman is pissin' me off. If Nick Fury were around, he'd know what to do. Cap would work with him to fix this mess, and Fury could take back control of SHIELD. But does anyone know where the guy is? Damn, where are you man, we need you to help!!!


-Weirdopky
He's in hiding because he's wanted for war crimes.

[Subotai]

I have no problem saying that Hill might have hoped for cap to do just what they did, but I honestly dont think so. Simply becouse of the last frame with her in. She doesnt look happy that cap attacked, and that last sentance is spoken to herself " You idiot. We were trying to save life" for me that indicate that Hill dont want to hunt heros but she will do as she is ordered to and her try to make it as painless as possibol just dived out the window.

I think she doesn't look happy because of Cap's getaway. And she knows if she's responsible for Cap's death - that's a career-killer, for sure. How would you like to be the SHIELD agent who killed Captain America?

And remember, this is the woman who psych-probed Spidey's mind - without consent.

That said, one area of CW which has been weak has been characters explaining their motivations.

[Conn Seanery]

When it comes to Cap surrender then it all comes to how he does it. He can do it stupid and say " I surrender now let of the helicarrier" wicth Hill would imidatly understand is a fraud. But even then she is obligate to play along. If she dont then its her job on the line. But if cap whenthey where not arguing had said something in the line of" well the law isnt passed yet and I have to think of it. Its simply a to big dissision to take right now. besides I want to hear what the others have to say on the matter. " Then Hill would most likly been slighty annoyed but let him go. Simply becouse he gave her almost what she wanted and the law isnt passed yet so one day more would not be that much a set back. My guess would be " you got one day to think about it"
the result : no fighting, he could get hold of the others and discussed it.
You're looking at the scene too much as someone whose already seen how it plays out. No one has hindsight in the present. Hill gave Cap no indication he was doing to be detained for disagreeing until the soldiers popped out. There's 3 panels in between when Cap refuses and the soldiers come out, maybe 30 seconds of dialogue, all on the same page. In that time you want Captain America to go from being a conscientious objector to a threat-ignoring liar? This guy stands for freedom and Hill has the gall to try and force him to change his mind? Come on.

At the time of when the cape killers emerges his only option to do it peacefully is to surrender or simply calmly ask her " am I under arrest?" If he was not then he could have said " then Im leaving" end of debate. If that had happend then Hill would not have opend fire simply becouse he was not under arrest, had not done anything illegal other then voice his opion etc. And again if she attacked him then it would be her job on the line.
Most people under threat arrest are usually told they are being arrested and why. The burden of making the arrest known isn't supposed to be on the one being arrested, it's up to the arresting officer to declare it. This meeting was being controlled by Hill, not Cap. You're also assuming Hill would've let him leave (even if he had brought up the question of his own arrest). Up until that point she had it fixed in her head that Cap was going to lead the Avengers into arresting other heroes. She had just as much "reason" to detain Cap in your scenario as she did in the one that actually went down.

And instead of asking if he was being arrested, what did he say instead? He calmly asked "Is this the hit squad you've been training to take down heroes?". When she confirms that it is, does he attack?

No, he continues talking. He's still holding out on the possibility that Hill can be reasoned with. What does she say? "Grow up and stop being an idiot", among other things. Are those the words of someone who has any intent of ending the situation peacefully, or at the very least grudgingly neutral? She's practically goading him into attacking. But does he?

No, he continues talking. Instead he tries to diffuse the situation with a "Weapons down". When Hill insists that her men continue to stand ready to fire on Captain America, it's clear that Hill has no intention of letting him leave. Does Cap attack?

No, he continues talking. Cap makes one last futile attempt for reason, only this time he lets them know he has no intention of submitting to their authority. It's the only hint at aggression he's made at this point, Hill's already made several. From there on out, the gloves are off.

Like I said earlier, it's all about the circumstances of the meeting. He was there to talk, not have guns shoved in his face. He came of his own free will and that's how he was going to leave, whether Hill liked it or not.

As for my leap of conlution: I dont conclude anything I offer another version of the same incident. People her are so danmed on making everything black and white where Cap is the hero who never does anything wrong and everybody likes him. If that was the case then he would not have been shoot at on the helicrafter. ANd to be totaly honest, if somebody smashes in the copit one a moving airplane and starts to give order then I would not be making any big leap in conclusion to say that pilot might be in shock. Its's not what they trainn you on in pilot school.
That's not the conclusion I was talking about, I more or less agreed that the pilot was in shock or scared after Cap landed on plane, perhaps all the way until he landed. It was the one you made afterward about the "hamburger and fries" incident. You called it kidnapping, I called it a consolation meal. Based on the events as they happened in the book, and how the incident was reported, I said I thought your conclusion was more far-fetched than mine.

As for Hill never give him a chance to leave, he never asked. Sometimes asking for a thing prevents you from having to fight for the same thing.
He had no reason to ask. That his right to leave was even in question shouldn't have happened in the first place.

And despite what you may think. I'm not helbendt on put all the blame on Cap, Im trying to get the point over that cap is just as much to blame as Hill. That they are both gulity in making it spiral out of controle. They booth have to big ego to try to do it the humble way. That is the whole problem.
That's not what I said, I said that you appear to be hell bent on having Cap surrender. You seem to think the only way for him to get out of that conversation peacefully is to either lie, submit, or question his own arrest. I'm saying that unless Cap's answer was a convincing "Fine, i'll hunt heroes for you" he wasn't going to be allowed to leave the heli-carrier. Hill's aggressive tactics prior to the fight are proof enough of that to me.

I have no problem saying that Hill might have hoped for cap to do just what they did, but I honestly dont think so. Simply becouse of the last frame with her in. She doesnt look happy that cap attacked, and that last sentance is spoken to herself " You idiot. We were trying to save life" for me that indicate that Hill dont want to hunt heros but she will do as she is ordered to and her try to make it as painless as possibol just dived out the window.
I'm not saying she wanted a fight either, but she was at the very least prepared for one (unless it's standard procedure to be surrounded by a couple of dozen soldiers hidden in secret wall compartments and decked out in "cape-killer" gear).

She needed (more than wanted) Cap leading the Avengers as a pro-registration team for the enactment of the law to go smoothly. Captain America, more than any other hero out there, would've been the best symbolic leader of the pro-registration movement. His presence would've ensured a lot less resistance than they've had up until now. So can I imagine Hill being instantly miffed at the thought that not only is there going to be major resistance, but also that this resistance is going to have a powerful American symbol of freedom as their figurehead? You're damn right I can.

I have no doubt Hill was doing what she thought was right, but that doesn't stop her actions from being completely wrong. So wrong that in the debate against the SHRA, she probably pushed the most important person in the cause from civil disobedience to actually taking up arms against her.

[IamtheRock3]

Lets see here.

When it comes to Cap surrender then it all comes to how he does it. He can do it stupid and say " I surrender now let of the helicarrier" wicth Hill would imidatly understand is a fraud. But even then she is obligate to play along. If she dont then its her job on the line. But if cap whenthey where not arguing had said something in the line of" well the law isnt passed yet and I have to think of it. Its simply a to big dissision to take right now. besides I want to hear what the others have to say on the matter. " Then Hill would most likly been slighty annoyed but let him go. Simply becouse he gave her almost what she wanted and the law isnt passed yet so one day more would not be that much a set back. My guess would be " you got one day to think about it"
the result : no fighting, he could get hold of the others and discussed it.

At the time of when the cape killers emerges his only option to do it peacefully is to surrender or simply calmly ask her " am I under arrest?" If he was not then he could have said " then Im leaving" end of debate. If that had happend then Hill would not have opend fire simply becouse he was not under arrest, had not done anything illegal other then voice his opion etc. And again if she attacked him then it would be her job on the line.

As for my leap of conlution: I dont conclude anything I offer another version of the same incident. People her are so danmed on making everything black and white where Cap is the hero who never does anything wrong and everybody likes him. If that was the case then he would not have been shoot at on the helicrafter. ANd to be totaly honest, if somebody smashes in the copit one a moving airplane and starts to give order then I would not be making any big leap in conclusion to say that pilot might be in shock. Its's not what they trainn you on in pilot school.

As for Hill never give him a chance to leave, he never asked. Sometimes asking for a thing prevents you from having to fight for the same thing.

And despite what you may think. I'm not helbendt on put all the blame on Cap, Im trying to get the point over that cap is just as much to blame as Hill. That they are both gulity in making it spiral out of controle. They booth have to big ego to try to do it the humble way. That is the whole problem.

I have no problem saying that Hill might have hoped for cap to do just what they did, but I honestly dont think so. Simply becouse of the last frame with her in. She doesnt look happy that cap attacked, and that last sentance is spoken to herself " You idiot. We were trying to save life" for me that indicate that Hill dont want to hunt heros but she will do as she is ordered to and her try to make it as painless as possibol just dived out the window.


Oh understand where you coming from and not putting it all on Cap

just simply think your wrong
Hill a bigger jerk, for to make her not require a few extra assumptions.

To me Hill and Shield had a pretty good laws, that makes sense and simple but manage to find ways to make it not.

Not to mention I read Hill in New Avenger an she just comes off as a villan

[Morw]

I have to smile abit, I suggest you all get hold of the directors cut book they gave out with Mark millers own words on the scene. You will see that they have not managed to fully get it over that Cap is hostile towards in behavior and manner before the guards arive.

At the 4th fram of the meeting Miller writter as a note: "cap remains dsidainful and Maria snaps a little"

Note on frame one page 22: Close up on Cap, Moody and eyes Narrowed

Note on frame 2 The other SHIELD guys are bitching as they they all quiz cap

Note on frame 3 Cap answear clearly, but his suspiciuse of the line of questioning.

Note one frame 4 Close on cap, eyes narrowed and quite angrylooking

Note onframe 5 Close on Maria, sneering a little.

Note on page 23 frame 1 Maria consults her little machine again and others all look at cap. we can see he that he's becoming increaningly uncomfortebol here.

Note on frame 2 cap and Maria face off.

Note on frame 3 cap is getting real angry here.

And so on to the war. The strange thing is that when Miller, the writter, describe Cap he uses words as disdain, angryloooking, moody and angry.
Maria is getting of slighty better, she even if she also is snerring and snaps back at him, in panel 1 on page 24 he describe her trying to reason with him.

So you see the writter wants it to be an angry Cap who does not want to listen to reason, he came there and beliving he could give orders etc. It might be a poor written cap, but I dont think so this is how I have seen cap threw most comics. its eighter his way or the highway.

There is no point in argue this anymore becouse its clear that the cap side cant see any flaws in cap and lies all the blame Hill. Its seems that what ever SHIELD does this day is evil. If SHIELD and Maria stopped a plot to blow up the planet by there them self then some here would complain that they did it in a evil way. Yes SHEILD is corrupt but that does not mean that all SHIELD does is bad.

[Donald Stone]

I have to smile abit, I suggest you all get hold of the directors cut book they gave out with Mark millers own words on the scene.If the artist didn't draw the book properly, thats Marvel's problem, not mine.

Going but what we saw in CW #1, Hill is gone and I don't blame Cap one bit for anything he did.

[IamtheRock3]

I have to smile abit, I suggest you all get hold of the directors cut book they gave out with Mark millers own words on the scene. You will see that they have not managed to fully get it over that Cap is hostile towards in behavior and manner before the guards arive.

At the 4th fram of the meeting Miller writter as a note: "cap remains dsidainful and Maria snaps a little"

Note on frame one page 22: Close up on Cap, Moody and eyes Narrowed

Note on frame 2 The other SHIELD guys are bitching as they they all quiz cap

Note on frame 3 Cap answear clearly, but his suspiciuse of the line of questioning.

Note one frame 4 Close on cap, eyes narrowed and quite angrylooking

Note onframe 5 Close on Maria, sneering a little.

Note on page 23 frame 1 Maria consults her little machine again and others all look at cap. we can see he that he's becoming increaningly uncomfortebol here.

Note on frame 2 cap and Maria face off.

Note on frame 3 cap is getting real angry here.

And so on to the war. The strange thing is that when Miller, the writter, describe Cap he uses words as disdain, angryloooking, moody and angry.
Maria is getting of slighty better, she even if she also is snerring and snaps back at him, in panel 1 on page 24 he describe her trying to reason with him.

So you see the writter wants it to be an angry Cap who does not want to listen to reason, he came there and beliving he could give orders etc. It might be a poor written cap, but I dont think so this is how I have seen cap threw most comics. its eighter his way or the highway.

There is no point in argue this anymore becouse its clear that the cap side cant see any flaws in cap and lies all the blame Hill. Its seems that what ever SHIELD does this day is evil. If SHIELD and Maria stopped a plot to blow up the planet by there them self then some here would complain that they did it in a evil way. Yes SHEILD is corrupt but that does not mean that all SHIELD does is bad.

Well for Can see the flaws in Cap

Just simply think your wrong man. It happens

Shield not always bad..has been recetnly were there. Didnt reay Miller comment on the director cut. Only read the Cival war and some ties in. So going by whats on paper and was actully shown and Drawn. Miller should of made it clear if that was his attention

But even then ANGRY sneers, didnt justify pulling out a peice and to shoot him. And she was calling him an idiot

And it clear least to me He couldnt just walk out

Least to me

[Conn Seanery]

I'll save my money, thanks. Nothing I read in the panel descriptions you reproduced tells me anything that opposes what I said (based on what i've read in the actual issue). A writer telling an artist what a panel is supposed to look like isn't new or even, in this case, revealing. Looking angry, moody, etc... and acting on those emotions are two different things.

Captain America made the choice to fight, I never once said that he didn't. But he made that choice based on Hill's aggressive treatment. I think that the only possibilities you're able to conceive of Captain America exiting the situation peacefully or without fighting is by acting disturbingly out of character, which does nothing but further convince me that you're as unfamiliar with him as i've suspected all along, Morw (and that's aside from the settings you provide being so backwardly slanted to your own opinion).

I agree that this argument is becoming tedious, however. Do feel free to keep smiling, tho'.

[Donald Stone]

There is no point in argue this anymore becouse its clear that the cap side cant see any flaws in cap and lies all the blame Hill. Its seems that what ever SHIELD does this day is evil. If SHIELD and Maria stopped a plot to blow up the planet by there them self then some here would complain that they did it in a evil way. Yes SHEILD is corrupt but that does not mean that all SHIELD does is bad.I don't see any flaws in what Cap did because he didn't do anything wrong.

And yes, SHIELD has done nothing wrong. They are the good guys, and everything would be hunky dory if not for those damn anti-reg folks running around ruining everything. I mean, it's not like SHIELD is holding people in a hazardous alternate dimension, or endangering innocent people in their attacks on unregistered heroes, or using lethal force against children or anything like that.

[XPac]

So you see the writter wants it to be an angry Cap who does not want to listen to reason, he came there and beliving he could give orders etc. It might be a poor written cap, but I dont think so this is how I have seen cap threw most comics. its eighter his way or the highway.



I agree that Cap was written to be angry. I don't believe that the writer ever said that he doesn't listen to reason. That's a conclusion you're making.. but it's selling Cap a bit short (at leat in my opinion) to assume that just because Cap is angry automatically translates to him being unable to be reasoned with.

Though if reasoning equates to them choosing to shoot at him, then its a different story.

[IamtheRock3]

Also one more thing

Dont think Cap always right. He did some bad things in Cival War I didnt like

but this wasnt one of them.

[Eallison]

I have to smile abit, I suggest you all get hold of the directors cut book they gave out with Mark millers own words on the scene. You will see that they have not managed to fully get it over that Cap is hostile towards in behavior and manner before the guards arive.

At the 4th fram of the meeting Miller writter as a note: "cap remains dsidainful and Maria snaps a little"

Note on frame one page 22: Close up on Cap, Moody and eyes Narrowed

Note on frame 2 The other SHIELD guys are bitching as they they all quiz cap

Note on frame 3 Cap answear clearly, but his suspiciuse of the line of questioning.

Note one frame 4 Close on cap, eyes narrowed and quite angrylooking

Note onframe 5 Close on Maria, sneering a little.

Note on page 23 frame 1 Maria consults her little machine again and others all look at cap. we can see he that he's becoming increaningly uncomfortebol here.

Note on frame 2 cap and Maria face off.

Note on frame 3 cap is getting real angry here.

And so on to the war. The strange thing is that when Miller, the writter, describe Cap he uses words as disdain, angryloooking, moody and angry.
Maria is getting of slighty better, she even if she also is snerring and snaps back at him, in panel 1 on page 24 he describe her trying to reason with him.

So you see the writter wants it to be an angry Cap who does not want to listen to reason, he came there and beliving he could give orders etc. It might be a poor written cap, but I dont think so this is how I have seen cap threw most comics. its eighter his way or the highway.

There is no point in argue this anymore becouse its clear that the cap side cant see any flaws in cap and lies all the blame Hill. Its seems that what ever SHIELD does this day is evil. If SHIELD and Maria stopped a plot to blow up the planet by there them self then some here would complain that they did it in a evil way. Yes SHEILD is corrupt but that does not mean that all SHIELD does is bad.


There are two problems with the above, IMHO;

1. This whole Director's Cut thing is, IMHO, another cynical grab for reader cash -- now you pay more for the same story you already had, with a few extras. Now, that's maybe not 100% fair, it's not like anyone is FORCING anyone to buy the Director's Cut, but it's just another way Marvel (and DC is no better) is gouging people.

2. As has already been said, I don't CARE what the writer's view is, or the editor's, or the cleaning lady's. I'm going to judge on what I actually saw in the comic (the "real" CW#1, not the Director's Cut, since the series was actually advertised as Civil War, with the DC being optional, and IMHO not "canon" like the real limited series).

Now, #2 above is extremely subjective, people will take away what they want from it, admittedly. I tend to side with those who see nothing wrong in what Cap did. Had Maria actually just wanted to talk, she wouldn't have brought in gun-toting agents. It's the precursor, IMHO, to Tony's claim of talking in CW#3. If you want to talk, you talk. If you want to dictate surrender terms, you bring firepower and backup.

For those who think what Hill did was rational, I'd like some references to past experiences with Captain America flying off the handle and attacking people for no reason -- and no, the incident with Pym in CW doesn't really apply. I can't think of any reasonable rationale to bring in heavily-armed troops that WOULDN'T escalate things. IMHO, that's exactly what Hill wanted. If Cap wasn't going to fall in line, she planned on taking him out before he could damage her cause.

Finally, the insights from CW DC#1 are nice, but largely irrelevant. If it wasn't accurately portrayed in the "real" book, it doesn't count. I mean, it's a great insight into the creative process, but if it wasn't conveyed, that's the fault of the writer, the artist, and/or the editor, not the readers.

It's the ending to Buffy S6 all over again. Soul my pasty white behind!

Take it and run.

[BigBoss]

I find it hard that he is anti reg you think he would be all for the goverment for the fact of goverment of ameroca. and going aganist the laws would almost hyprocritice his name.

[Arawn]

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment III

No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Amendment VII

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Please see 4, 5 and 9. As you can see registration, which in and of itself is a form of descrimination is a violation of the US Bill Of Rights. Amendment 9 itself being the most important of those violated. The very idea that who or what you are could make you suspect, or force you to cary a lable is against everything America itself stands for.

Please forgive the comparison for being a little tacky, but this will hold up. Back in the early 1940s an entire people were forced to register because of who they were. They were made to wear clothes and symbols that set them apart so that all around them would know who and what they were on site. If you remember correctly several million were put to death. At the time President Dwight D. Eisenhower vowed never again would such evil be tollerated by the world.

Again I realise comparing the Holocaust to the Marvel Civil War is a bit extreme. But if you're a history buff you can see the comparison, and the Marvel writers have never denied the parallel.

[Calybos]

I find it hard that he is anti reg you think he would be all for the goverment for the fact of goverment of ameroca. and going aganist the laws would almost hyprocritice his name.
I don't follow. America is not its government, and vice versa. Captain America stands for American ideals, regardless of what the law says. The law can be wrong, and often has been.

[BigBoss]

I don't follow. America is not its government, and vice versa. Captain America stands for American ideals, regardless of what the law says. The law can be wrong, and often has been.
explain what you mean alittle more I aint following.

[BigBoss]

I really dont se no bad or good. all I see is opoinoin.

[XPac]

explain what you mean alittle more I aint following.

America as a country will sometimes do things that conflict with the ideals the country hold in theory.

America at one time did legalize slavery. Captain America I'm sure would be against that.

The near genocide of the native american population likewise is something I imagine Cap would disagree with.

America during WW2 put innocent japaneese american citizens in internment camps. Again, it's something I suspect Captain America would oppose.

Just because something is legal doesn't mean Cap will agree with it because American government sometimes will do thing that conflict with it's own ideals, and those ideals are what Cap represents.

[Gregg Helmberger]

America as a country will sometimes do things that conflict with the ideals the country hold in theory.

America at one time did legalize slavery. Captain America I'm sure would be against that.

The near genocide of the native american population likewise is something I imagine Cap would disagree with.

America during WW2 put innocent japaneese american citizens in internment camps. Again, it's something I suspect Captain America would oppose.

Just because something is legal doesn't mean Cap will agree with it because American government sometimes will do thing that conflict with it's own ideals, and those ideals are what Cap represents.

In addition, I think Captain America would find this particular law pretty rephrensible just based on its own merits. Remember, this is a law that compels anyone with powers to become a government employee for the rest of their lives, subject to orders they're compelled to follow under penalty of severe sanction of law. I think a lot of people are losing sight of how shocking that is -- an entire class of people are being compelled to give up freedom of association and become government servants. For some perspective, change "Anyone with powers" to ANY other descriptor and see how you feel about it, i.e.:


Anyone who has red hair must become a government employee for the rest of their lives, subject to orders they're compelled to follow under penalty of severe sanction of law.

Anyone whose ancestors came from Asia must become a government employee for the rest of their lives, subject to orders they're compelled to follow under penalty of severe sanction of law.

Anyone over six feet tall must become a government employee for the rest of their lives, subject to orders they're compelled to follow under penalty of severe sanction of law.

Anyone who can run the 40-yard dash in less than 4.8 seconds must become a government employee for the rest of their lives, subject to orders they're compelled to follow under penalty of severe sanction of law.


I think we can all pretty much agree that we'd be stunned and appalled by any law stipulating the aforementioned, but many people think it's fine when applied to people with powers. I don't for a second believe that Captain America would be one of those people, however -- if he were, it would go against how he's been portrayed in every comic since he got thawed. Indeed, anything less that utmost resistance would be shocking to me.

[bulbasteve]

Anyone who has red hair must become a government employee for the rest of their lives, subject to orders they're compelled to follow under penalty of severe sanction of law.

Anyone whose ancestors came from Asia must become a government employee for the rest of their lives, subject to orders they're compelled to follow under penalty of severe sanction of law.

Anyone over six feet tall must become a government employee for the rest of their lives, subject to orders they're compelled to follow under penalty of severe sanction of law.

Anyone who can run the 40-yard dash in less than 4.8 seconds must become a government employee for the rest of their lives, subject to orders they're compelled to follow under penalty of severe sanction of law.
[/LIST]

I think we can all pretty much agree that we'd be stunned and appalled by any law stipulating the aforementioned, but many people think it's fine when applied to people with powers. I don't for a second believe that Captain America would be one of those people, however -- if he were, it would go against how he's been portrayed in every comic since he got thawed. Indeed, anything less that utmost resistance would be shocking to me.

But powers are actually a real difference. I mean hell there are different rules in say joining the military between women and men. So a man can lift a hundred more pounds than a women and run a bit faster and they are treated differently, but someone who can lift 40tons and can run at supersonic speeds will be treated the same as everyone else? That isn't some sort of socially concious view of the world, it's just plain dumb.

[jackolover]

But powers are actually a real difference. I mean hell there are different rules in say joining the military between women and men. So a man can lift a hundred more pounds than a women and run a bit faster and they are treated differently, but someone who can lift 40tons and can run at supersonic speeds will be treated the same as everyone else? That isn't some sort of socially concious view of the world, it's just plain dumb.

Amen, to that sucker! I like this argument. I have been looking for reasons why capes are a special case and you can't legislate like they are humans. There are precidents, thank you.

[Gregg Helmberger]

But powers are actually a real difference. I mean hell there are different rules in say joining the military between women and men. So a man can lift a hundred more pounds than a women and run a bit faster and they are treated differently, but someone who can lift 40tons and can run at supersonic speeds will be treated the same as everyone else? That isn't some sort of socially concious view of the world, it's just plain dumb.

You can certainly make a case that there ought to be special laws regarding superpowered individuals, but I don't think for a second that Captain America would buy that they all ought to be deprived of their Constitutional rights for the actions of a few. I believe Captain America, were he written even remotely in character, would fight that kind of law with everything inside of him, to the bitter end. Cap has never been portrayed as a "the law is the law and if the government says it, it' must be right" type. He's well aware of how badly the legal process can go off the tracks, and I can't imagine for a second he'd support legalizing slavery of supers any more than he would legalizing slavery of blacks or Hispanics or anyone else.

[bulbasteve]

You can certainly make a case that there ought to be special laws regarding superpowered individuals, but I don't think for a second that Captain America would buy that they all ought to be deprived of their Constitutional rights for the actions of a few. I believe Captain America, were he written even remotely in character, would fight that kind of law with everything inside of him, to the bitter end. Cap has never been portrayed as a "the law is the law and if the government says it, it' must be right" type. He's well aware of how badly the legal process can go off the tracks, and I can't imagine for a second he'd support legalizing slavery of supers any more than he would legalizing slavery of blacks or Hispanics or anyone else.

What Constitutional rights do you think are being violated?

I find it interesting you mention slavery. But you should really read Lincoln's Lyceum address. Some examples:

"...let every man remember that to violate the law, is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear the character of his own, and his children's liberty."

"When I so pressingly urge a strict observance of all the laws, let me not be understood as saying there are no bad laws, nor that grievances may not arise, for the redress of which, no legal provisions have been made.--I mean to say no such thing. But I do mean to say, that, although bad laws, if they exist, should be repealed as soon as possible, still while they continue in force, for the sake of example, they should be religiously observed. So also in unprovided cases. If such arise, let proper legal provisions be made for them with the least possible delay; but, till then, let them, if not too intolerable, be borne with.

There is no grievance that is a fit object of redress by mob law. In any case that arises, as for instance, the promulgation of abolitionism, one of two positions is necessarily true; that is, the thing is right within itself, and therefore deserves the protection of all law and all good citizens; or, it is wrong, and therefore proper to be prohibited by legal enactments; and in neither case, is the interposition of mob law, either necessary, justifiable, or excusable."



And this was a guy talking about ACTUAL Slavery for pete's sake.

[Gregg Helmberger]

What Constitutional rights do you think are being violated?

I find it interesting you mention slavery. But you should really read Lincoln's Lyceum address. Some examples:

"...let every man remember that to violate the law, is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear the character of his own, and his children's liberty."

"When I so pressingly urge a strict observance of all the laws, let me not be understood as saying there are no bad laws, nor that grievances may not arise, for the redress of which, no legal provisions have been made.--I mean to say no such thing. But I do mean to say, that, although bad laws, if they exist, should be repealed as soon as possible, still while they continue in force, for the sake of example, they should be religiously observed. So also in unprovided cases. If such arise, let proper legal provisions be made for them with the least possible delay; but, till then, let them, if not too intolerable, be borne with.

There is no grievance that is a fit object of redress by mob law. In any case that arises, as for instance, the promulgation of abolitionism, one of two positions is necessarily true; that is, the thing is right within itself, and therefore deserves the protection of all law and all good citizens; or, it is wrong, and therefore proper to be prohibited by legal enactments; and in neither case, is the interposition of mob law, either necessary, justifiable, or excusable."



And this was a guy talking about ACTUAL Slavery for pete's sake.

A category of people are being compelled to work for a given entity for their entire lives, regardless of their desires and based entirely on who they are, under penalty of extreme sanction. How does that differ from slavery? In what particular?

And yes, Lincoln counseled patience and working through the law. But in the end, the conflict over slavery came to very violent blows. He didn't want a fight, but a fight came. In this case, Lincoln was wrong.

It's no different here. It's absurd to expect a free person to voluntarily put on the yoke, and Cap never, ever would.

[jackolover]

What Constitutional rights do you think are being violated?

I find it interesting you mention slavery. But you should really read Lincoln's Lyceum address. Some examples:

"...let every man remember that to violate the law, is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear the character of his own, and his children's liberty."

"When I so pressingly urge a strict observance of all the laws, let me not be understood as saying there are no bad laws, nor that grievances may not arise, for the redress of which, no legal provisions have been made.--I mean to say no such thing. But I do mean to say, that, although bad laws, if they exist, should be repealed as soon as possible, still while they continue in force, for the sake of example, they should be religiously observed. So also in unprovided cases. If such arise, let proper legal provisions be made for them with the least possible delay; but, till then, let them, if not too intolerable, be borne with.

There is no grievance that is a fit object of redress by mob law. In any case that arises, as for instance, the promulgation of abolitionism, one of two positions is necessarily true; that is, the thing is right within itself, and therefore deserves the protection of all law and all good citizens; or, it is wrong, and therefore proper to be prohibited by legal enactments; and in neither case, is the interposition of mob law, either necessary, justifiable, or excusable."



And this was a guy talking about ACTUAL Slavery for pete's sake.

Okay, that was Lincoln's opinion. Who says Lincoln's quotes are relevant?

[bulbasteve]

A category of people are being compelled to work for a given entity for their entire lives, regardless of their desires and based entirely on who they are, under penalty of extreme sanction. How does that differ from slavery? In what particular?

There is zero proof of that in any of the comics. How exactly do you know they can't retire? Where is the proof of any of this? I already explained to you in the other topic how the law seems to work. You have to give the Congress SOME credit in making laws.

And yes, Lincoln counseled patience and working through the law. But in the end, the conflict over slavery came to very violent blows. He didn't want a fight, but a fight came. In this case, Lincoln was wrong.

It's no different here. It's absurd to expect a free person to voluntarily put on the yoke, and Cap never, ever would.

You have to be ****ing kidding me. Even in a comic no amount of vigilantism would have stopped the Civil War from happening. Neither will it stop the MU's 'civil war' from happening.

This is the 21st century, there is a free press, freedom of essembly, democratically elected representatives who put the law in place, a court system where there are enough "activist judges" to put this law to bed in half a day if they thought it was bad.

Okay, that was Lincoln's opinion. Who says Lincoln's quotes are relevant?

He used the comparison to blacks in slavery as analogous to what is going on in the registration act, and when there is an unjust law a person can have justification to rebel against it. I gave Lincolns own view on rebellion against unjust laws. Now of course I don't think the act is it all comparable or relevant to slavery, but he does so that was a response to his claim that it justifies breaking the law.

[Gregg Helmberger]

There is zero proof of that in any of the comics. How exactly do you know they can't retire? Where is the proof of any of this? I already explained to you in the other topic how the law seems to work. You have to give the Congress SOME credit in making laws.

Zero proof? Maybe you've been reading different comics than I have. It's been stated over multiple titles and issues that anyone with powers HAS to register with and work for SHIELD regardless of whether or not they're active. It's been stated by a SHIELD agent that the law is precisely the equivalent of a draft in terms of compulsion -- this, by the way, as she was in the process of threatening a cooperative super with prison. A retired super didn't want to register and be forced to go fight and was told "we'll cross that bridge when we come to it," meaning that, yeah, it's a possibility AT LEAST. And yes, you've explained to me how you believe the law works, and I believe the evidence shows that you're wrong.



You have to be ****ing kidding me. Even in a comic no amount of vigilantism would have stopped the Civil War from happening. Neither will it stop the MU's 'civil war' from happening.

If you're saying what I think you're saying, then we agree on this point -- once the law was enacted, there was no way a fight wasn't coming.


This is the 21st century, there is a free press, freedom of essembly, democratically elected representatives who put the law in place, a court system where there are enough "activist judges" to put this law to bed in half a day if they thought it was bad.

And thus far, nobody has stopped the law, which would tend to mitigate against your opinion. Unregistered supers are being violently attacked and subdued -- even when not engaged in vigilante activity -- and imprisoned in another dimension. Presumably, this is what the law authorizes, because thus far nobody in any comic that I've read has said it isn't. So, regardless of the opinions of the free press, democractically elected representatives, or "activist judges," a very draconian law was passed and is currently being enforced.

[jackolover]

He used the comparison to blacks in slavery as analogous to what is going on in the registration act, and when there is an unjust law a person can have justification to rebel against it. I gave Lincolns own view on rebellion against unjust laws. Now of course I don't think the act is it all comparable or relevant to slavery, but he does so that was a response to his claim that it justifies breaking the law.

Sure. I understand you were quoting Lincoln, as a response to the other poster. And Lincolns idea of just going along with the bad law until it gets repealed, is fair, I suppose, unless its a particularly bad law. Does SHRA constitute a particularly bad law? In Captain America's view, I think it does, therefore, he is obliged to resist it. Even with force. In any case, Lincoln prescribes that you just roll over and let unjust laws act upon it's citizens, until their repealed. I don't think the modern citizen would buy that. I think the modern citizen would take to the streets in protest. Maybe even a post-soviet demonstation until the law is tossed out.

[bulbasteve]

Zero proof? Maybe you've been reading different comics than I have. It's been stated over multiple titles and issues that anyone with powers HAS to register with and work for SHIELD regardless of whether or not they're active.

The Two-Gun Kid, a former Avenger, is working as a New York State bounty hunter in the latest She-Hulk, not under SHIELD.

It's been stated by a SHIELD agent that the law is precisely the equivalent of a draft in terms of compulsion -- this, by the way, as she was in the process of threatening a cooperative super with prison.

Threatening him with an already existing criminal charge, which she says she will take away after the mission is completed. If this was a draft he would be thrown in jail for draft dodging. She was just using hyperbole, I mean, wouldn't you be mighty mad if you found out a superhero who said he cleaned up his act is engaging in the same criminal activity...this time against a charity?

Same goes for Speedball which we also see in Frontline being told that the charges will go away if he works with SHIELD. Same with Spider-Man not being asked by Tony if he wanted to be put on the Hero Hunting squad, it was his way of getting off of his previous vigilante charges.

There are three seperate cases of the same deal, and no cases of an outright draft. We have seen noone locked up because they refused to go on a mission, only for not signing the act.

A retired super didn't want to register and be forced to go fight and was told "we'll cross that bridge when we come to it," meaning that, yeah, it's a possibility AT LEAST. And yes, you've explained to me how you believe the law works, and I believe the evidence shows that you're wrong.

He also said she wouldn't be expected to fight Doctor Doom. And just because you have retired doesn't mean that the previous vigilante charges just disappear, so she would have had the same choice of serve or have the charges come up against you, and seeing as he made the Doom comment its perfect reasonable to think she may just be training the young heroes.

Also think about it, Stark knew that Cage would be thrown in jail for not signing. He didn't want her to be prosecuted on some previous charges and thrown in jail if she said no to a mission, or if she didn't sign the act, to leave a baby as an orphan. Heck if anything his rhetoric may have been a hint for her to do what she did and move to Canada so something like that won't happen.

And thus far, nobody has stopped the law, which would tend to mitigate against your opinion. Unregistered supers are being violently attacked and subdued -- even when not engaged in vigilante activity -- and imprisoned in another dimension. Presumably, this is what the law authorizes, because thus far nobody in any comic that I've read has said it isn't. So, regardless of the opinions of the free press, democractically elected representatives, or "activist judges," a very draconian law was passed and is currently being enforced.

You don't need to be currently commiting a crime to be arrested, you can be arrested for your previous vigilante activities and the fact you haven't registered which you are legally required to do.

And if anything the fact that the press or the courts are not taking on the issue only helps my point. All the news would be covering Caps latest break out of heroes being out instead of focusing on the issues. And having people attack law enforcement does not exactly help public opinion.

What do you really think would work better? Cap breaking out heroes and going after a losing war? Or giving up the authorities and going through the court system to get it overturnd. And his supporters having an hour on Larry King or something explaining why they don't support the act?

Sure. I understand you were quoting Lincoln, as a response to the other poster. And Lincolns idea of just going along with the bad law until it gets repealed, is fair, I suppose, unless its a particularly bad law. Does SHRA constitute a particularly bad law? In Captain America's view, I think it does, therefore, he is obliged to resist it. Even with force. In any case, Lincoln prescribes that you just roll over and let unjust laws act upon it's citizens, until their repealed. I don't think the modern citizen would buy that. I think the modern citizen would take to the streets in protest. Maybe even a post-soviet demonstation until the law is tossed out.

Well taking to the streets and protesting is different than busting prisoners out while they are being transported. But yeah if anything there are MORE ways to deal with a bad law than there were in Lincolns day. In this country there is just no excuse for violence. Heck look at the civil rights movement which Marvel like to make for their mutant allegories. I mean did Rosa Parks punch the police when they arrested her where she sat on the bus? Did the people at the MLK rallies attack the police who used fire hoses? Protest, peaceful protest, works. Lincolns point in his many speeches about that issue is that violent abolishonists only hurt their shared cause, and if anything was a huge roadblock to getting the laws fixed.

[jackolover]

I'd like to see a scene where cap is kneeling in front of Lincoln, head bowed, his arm leaning on his shield.

Nobody's right. They're all wrong about SHRA, and I think cap would be the first to admit it. What goes wrong is, that the public feeling about the capes changes and someone decides thats got to become a law. That's what agrivates the situation. And somehow, they have to sort out capes freedoms and the disasters that go on. Maybe they can agree to dislike the disasters, but not punish the capes in the mean time.
Do the capes need punishment, because that's what it's coming down to?

I remember the first philosophy course I did, and the method of debate was always the same. The greater good versus the individuals rights. Many people picked individual rights. Surprisingly, I tended to choose the greater good, with the attending lesser evil of loosing individual rights. And these were for situations involving death. How do you resolve avoiding much death, involving small groups of individuals? And if you could be cold and heartless enough, you picked the greater good. It is harder to take this stance, when they involve the ones you love being segregated to a lesser significants.

[jackolover]

Well taking to the streets and protesting is different than busting prisoners out while they are being transported. But yeah if anything there are MORE ways to deal with a bad law than there were in Lincolns day. In this country there is just no excuse for violence. Heck look at the civil rights movement which Marvel like to make for their mutant allegories. I mean did Rosa Parks punch the police when they arrested her where she sat on the bus? Did the people at the MLK rallies attack the police who used fire hoses? Protest, peaceful protest, works. Lincolns point in his many speeches about that issue is that violent abolishonists only hurt their shared cause, and if anything was a huge roadblock to getting the laws fixed.

bulbasteve, I love how you are arguing out this issue, Greg Helmberger, also. I like it.

One of the points I'd like to address was involving Jessica Jones. If there was a threat to use outstanding criminal activity charges against her, how come the autorities never persued them? Not until the SHRA comes along, do we see these charges paraded out, (although not on her, but Wonderman). That to me is blackmail. I also like the point you made, about if cap just swallowed his pride and surrendered, he could go through the courts. That hasn't been tested yet.

Peaceful protest may work, and Gandhi proved it, but it is the violence of the pro-side that may be too hard for cap to ignore.

Mind you? Come to think about it, I don't think they have arrested one big name cape yet? I wonder how that would work if a high profile was dragged away?

[bulbasteve]

One of the points I'd like to address was involving Jessica Jones. If there was a threat to use outstanding criminal activity charges against her, how come the autorities never persued them? Not until the SHRA comes along, do we see these charges paraded out, (although not on her, but Wonderman). That to me is blackmail. I also like the point you made, about if cap just swallowed his pride and surrendered, he could go through the courts. That hasn't been tested yet.

Well she retired (I don't even know if her old identities were made public before, that could be part of it) and Cage was a member of the Avengers so the police probably didn't much care in pursuing it. But guys like Spider-Man were still hunted down up till the act was passed. Last I remember was in MTU with the Invincible crossover, but I don't read the core stuff I guess it happens there too still.

Good point about Wonder Man, you would think the IRS would follow up a bit more on an admitted embezzler. I guess there could be any number of reasons, but we don't really know about the scope of the case, could have just been still investigating or something. You know how strange marvel time is and all, he probably just had the charity for 3 days ;p

I don't know if it's really blackmail though. If he went through the mission and still held it over his head, then I would say that is blackmail. But for now it seems to me to be the policy that the act has. And didn't the girl sarcastically say to "write his congressman"? Well if it IS blackmail, couldnt he have actually done just that? If it wasn't in the act itself I'm sure congress would have a field day exposing dirty dealings in SHIELD.

And if they didn't go to court, that would probably be one of the first ways you would get the act tossed out real quick.

Peaceful protest may work, and Gandhi proved it, but it is the violence of the pro-side that may be too hard for cap to ignore.

Mind you? Come to think about it, I don't think they have arrested one big name cape yet? I wonder how that would work if a high profile was dragged away?

Well they are superheroes, hard to put them away without some violence. And even the most far out there book like Frontline have stressed that they tranquelize them, they don't go for kills or even any real serious injury. But yeah most high profile guys are still at large.

[jackolover]

I don't know if it's really blackmail though. If he went through the mission and still held it over his head, then I would say that is blackmail. But for now it seems to me to be the policy that the act has. And didn't the girl sarcastically say to "write his congressman"? Well if it IS blackmail, couldnt he have actually done just that? If it wasn't in the act itself I'm sure congress would have a field day exposing dirty dealings in SHIELD.

Write his congressman? Hmm. That might put him at risk, because then the law WOULD be made aware of dirty dealings Wonderman may be involved in. That's why he didn't come at that. The other point to that is sarcastic girl behaving very flippantly about the pressure she put on Simon. That may be very typical of any police procedure, in any police station, so it could be quite legit.

[Gregg Helmberger]

The Two-Gun Kid, a former Avenger, is working as a New York State bounty hunter in the latest She-Hulk, not under SHIELD.


Reading your post, I come to the conclusion that we just have fundamentally different attitudes, and irreconcilably so. You have a very charitable view of the government in MU and of SHIELD -- I don't. I'm not saying you're wrong -- heck, it may be that none of the gloom-and-doom scenarios I see as being inevitable will come to pass, and then I'll look like a big tool (and so will Cap). So, I don't think either of us will convince the other of a darned thing. Still, I respect your arguments and your style.

Anyway, I haven't read She-Hulk so I can't comment on Two-Gun Kid specifically (other than to say I always thought he was irredeemably lame, which is another topic). I will say that my reading of what I have seen indicates that all supers will be under SHIELD control, whether or not SHIELD exercises that control at any given moment. Therefore, any given super could be off doing whatever -- from bounty hunting to raising a kid -- but when SHIELD gives an order, they had darned well better jump. That's my reading of the Act.


Threatening him with an already existing criminal charge, which she says she will take away after the mission is completed. If this was a draft he would be thrown in jail for draft dodging. She was just using hyperbole, I mean, wouldn't you be mighty mad if you found out a superhero who said he cleaned up his act is engaging in the same criminal activity...this time against a charity?

Same goes for Speedball which we also see in Frontline being told that the charges will go away if he works with SHIELD. Same with Spider-Man not being asked by Tony if he wanted to be put on the Hero Hunting squad, it was his way of getting off of his previous vigilante charges.

There are three seperate cases of the same deal, and no cases of an outright draft. We have seen noone locked up because they refused to go on a mission, only for not signing the act.

I'm not sure where you're getting the bit about Spider-Man -- was this specifically stated somewhere and I missed it? What I read of Tony's rationale was that he said Spider-Man was just too high profile to be left off the hero hunter squad and there wasn't time to consult him. But I'm not reading every crossover so I confess I may have missed something.

Speedball wasn't offered an "accept registration and get out of jail" card. He was offered "accept responsibility for killing a bunch of kids and get out of jail card," which isn't even close to being the same thing. He doesn't feel responsible for killing anyone -- he was just doing his job the same as he'd always done it, the same as all superheroes had always done it -- and so he couldn't accept the deal.

And for me, the jury is still out on Wonderman. My sense reading it was that the charge was trumped up or else something someone else did, but I need more information before I make a decision there. If he actually did embezzle, then screw him, I never liked him anyway. But the sense I got reading it was that it was something non-criminal on his part that they were going to use to beat him over the head -- again, I could be wrong, but I don't want to comment until I know for sure. Either way, the SHIELD agent's statements dovetail with what we've seen in other comics: when you sign the act, SHIELD owns your ass.




He also said she wouldn't be expected to fight Doctor Doom. And just because you have retired doesn't mean that the previous vigilante charges just disappear, so she would have had the same choice of serve or have the charges come up against you, and seeing as he made the Doom comment its perfect reasonable to think she may just be training the young heroes.

Also think about it, Stark knew that Cage would be thrown in jail for not signing. He didn't want her to be prosecuted on some previous charges and thrown in jail if she said no to a mission, or if she didn't sign the act, to leave a baby as an orphan. Heck if anything his rhetoric may have been a hint for her to do what she did and move to Canada so something like that won't happen.

Jessica doesn't WANT to train new heroes. She wants to stay home and raise her kid. Tony's response to her statement about not wanting to fight Doom was "No, no." That's not, "No, you won't have to fight Doom." "No, no," doesn't mean ANYTHING. It could just as easily mean, "I know you don't want to fight Doom." It's not an ironclad assurance. It's not even a halfassed shadow of an assurance. It's just meaningless verbiage said by someone who was trying to convince someone else to do something that's against her best interests. And it was followed by, "We'll cross that bridge when we come to it," which is another way of saying, "You're right, but we'll deal with the problem after we own you and you have to take our orders."

If there were charges outstanding against Jessica, then she would have been arrested for them already. Everyone knew where she was, the cops included. There were no outstanding charges against her that have ever been mentioned anywhere, as far as I have ever heard. So I'm not really sure where you're going with that. And yes, I suppose, "Sign the act or I'll arrest you" MIGHT have been a veiled suggestion to go to Canada; on the other hand, it might also have been a statement that she had to sign the act or he'd arrest her. I tend to stick to the obvious wherever I can, but Tony's a subtle guy, so who knows.



You don't need to be currently commiting a crime to be arrested, you can be arrested for your previous vigilante activities and the fact you haven't registered which you are legally required to do.

Cage had no outstanding charges against him. His previous vigilante activities weren't a crime, because he everyone knew where he lived and he hadn't been arrested, so...obviously, not a crime. His crime was sitting in his own house and not becoming an indentured servant to SHIELD. The law, after all, makes it a crime to exist as a powered individual not under the employ of SHIELD. He felt that to be wildly unjust, and I agree with him completely.


And if anything the fact that the press or the courts are not taking on the issue only helps my point. All the news would be covering Caps latest break out of heroes being out instead of focusing on the issues. And having people attack law enforcement does not exactly help public opinion.

What do you really think would work better? Cap breaking out heroes and going after a losing war? Or giving up the authorities and going through the court system to get it overturnd. And his supporters having an hour on Larry King or something explaining why they don't support the act?

So is Larry going to go to the extradimensional prison to do the interview? These folks aren't being processed through the judicial system, they're being subdued by paramilitary units and disappeared to a prison on another plane of existence. What judicial process do they receive? Who knows? Nothing's been said. There has been a lot of talk about, "Cap should have surrendered with a lawyer and fought it in court," but what have we seen from SHIELD that would indicate that would have been allowed to work? They've blown up entire buildings to capture single heroes. Tony destroyed one of his own factories to try to capture them. And when they are captured they aren't given a press conference, they're removed from our entire dimension!

[bulbasteve]

Write his congressman? Hmm. That might put him at risk, because then the law WOULD be made aware of dirty dealings Wonderman may be involved in...

Well you gotta remember all that Secret War stuff that happened just recently. Even though the government put a stooge like Hill in place when Fury went into hiding for going against direct orders given to SHIELD. There are still guys like the mysteriously long living Dum Dum Dugan at top posts. And this is a world where there is a "real world" military action still in Iraq with our real world weapons compared to suped up Cape Killers fighting heroes.

The more I think about this whole thing you really have to give Tony a lot of credit for his dealings with Congress before the act went into place in those issues of ASM. I mean if you were in Congress, I bet anyone of either party would have wanted the heroes working for the government, not a UN spy agency (especially in a Republican dominate congress and executive). So it would be a pretty big concession to the super-hero community to let them work for SHIELD. But like I said with all the bad blood between SHIELD and the government I think they would look for any excuse to throw some mud on SHIELD.

...whether or not SHIELD exercises that control at any given moment. Therefore, any given super could be off doing whatever -- from bounty hunting to raising a kid -- but when SHIELD gives an order, they had darned well better jump. That's my reading of the Act.

Could be. But wasn't that always the case? When Fury would say jump cap would say how high. Like I said if SHIELD tried to strong arm someone with no criminal charges pending I would hope the guy would haul tail to whatever the superhuman relations department the governemnt set up to get the government to stop it.

I'm not sure where you're getting the bit about Spider-Man -- was this specifically stated somewhere and I missed it? What I read of Tony's rationale was that he said Spider-Man was just too high profile to be left off the hero hunter squad and there wasn't time to consult him. But I'm not reading every crossover so I confess I may have missed something.

I'm just trying to no-prize what everyone is assuming is Stark just being a jerk. Granted he would still be a bit of a jerk if he didn't tell Spidey it was actually his working on the Hero Hunting squad that got all his prior charges erased but it's slightly less jerky than Stark 'drafting' him onto the team.

Speedball wasn't offered an "accept registration and get out of jail" card. He was offered "accept responsibility for killing a bunch of kids and get out of jail card," which isn't even close to being the same thing...

I think the exact deal was "accept responsibility and work with SHIELD with the training of heroes and get out of jail free card". Which is why I mentioned it, but I'd have to look back through the issue to see exactly.

And for me, the jury is still out on Wonderman. My sense reading it was that the charge was trumped up or else something someone else did, but I need more information before I make a decision there. If he actually did embezzle, then screw him, I never liked him anyway.

To me if it was trumped up, he should be more than happy to have his day in court. To me it seems the SHIELD agent was just strong arming him, cause really he is a scumbag if he is embezzling from a charity.

If there were charges outstanding against Jessica, then she would have been arrested for them already. Everyone knew where she was, the cops included. There were no outstanding charges against her that have ever been mentioned anywhere, as far as I have ever heard. So I'm not really sure where you're going with that. And yes, I suppose, "Sign the act or I'll arrest you" MIGHT have been a veiled suggestion to go to Canada; on the other hand, it might also have been a statement that she had to sign the act or he'd arrest her. I tend to stick to the obvious wherever I can, but Tony's a subtle guy, so who knows.

Cage had no outstanding charges against him. His previous vigilante activities weren't a crime, because he everyone knew where he lived and he hadn't been arrested, so...obviously, not a crime. His crime was sitting in his own house and not becoming an indentured servant to SHIELD. The law, after all, makes it a crime to exist as a powered individual not under the employ of SHIELD. He felt that to be wildly unjust, and I agree with him completely.


Well noone was enforcing the laws before, that doesn't mean they weren't in place, when Cage goes and beats up stilt man in the middle of manhattan on his own time, it's still a crime, even if the cops don't bother to bust down his door. I don't know about Jessica though, or how public she was about her short lived costumed identities, so I really can't say.

Anyway his crime was not signing an act legally created by the government. There is nothing wrong with Stark saying that they will cross bridges when they come to them. If SHIELD oversteps their bounds then a guy like Stark isn't just going to buckle under, it's just dumb for a guy like Cage to jump to conclusions to how he THINKS shield will act. If Cage thought he was going to be some slave to SHIELD, maybe he should have done what Stark did and go to Congress and voice his concerns and not just sit around his house cursing the government instead of being active in the shaping of it.

So is Larry going to go to the extradimensional prison to do the interview? These folks aren't being processed through the judicial system, they're being subdued by paramilitary units and disappeared to a prison on another plane of existence. What judicial process do they receive? Who knows? Nothing's been said.

Well I sure hope Cap has a human lawyer. You see the lawyers of the guys at Gitmo on the news, no reason to think this would be any different (since sadly Marvel is trying to make that allusion too). But the public just won't be supporting Cap anymore. If he would have surrendered peacefully THAT would be something that might bring more of the public on his side. You have to remember this not some cloak and dagger superhero issue, it's a public issue, you aren't going to win it by beating guys up, but by rallying public opinion.

Damn gotta make these shorter...

[Kid Lantern]

The Registration act is a big nasty, fascist law.
(Much like the Patriot act and its friends.)

Cap is the spirit of america, the american way, these laws are unamerican and dictatorial. (Much like the Patriot act and its friends.)

[The Shadow]

if anything there are MORE ways to deal with a bad law than there were in Lincolns day. In this country there is just no excuse for violence.
I give you the American Declaration of Independence.

when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security
You don't "throw off such Government" by having a sit-in at the Washington monument.

The United States is in existance as a country because they DID act violently and they DID stand up for themselves when the laws were unjust and the government wouldn't listen.

[Kyle_Ion]

I believe Cap is anti-reg because sheild attacked him, shoot he even tried to use the autority that he used to have with shield to control the soldiers. To make matters worse Hill said I want you to take control of the avengers and use them to hunt the super powers beings and he said no the soldiers fired on him. I also say this law is a bunch of bull and Iron Man is a big jerk, and I hope this hero registration ends up being wrong and thrown out.

[Jmacq1]

I believe Cap is anti-reg because sheild attacked him, shoot he even tried to use the autority that he used to have with shield to control the soldiers. To make matters worse Hill said I want you to take control of the avengers and use them to hunt the super powers beings and he said no the soldiers fired on him. I also say this law is a bunch of bull and Iron Man is a big jerk, and I hope this hero registration ends up being wrong and thrown out.

Iron Man's a great character and the law has -some- good points, but as it stands I can't agree with it, mostly because of SHIELD's involvement.

They've made it pretty clear that all the "good eggs" that were Fury's loyal "inner circle" (Like the Contessa, "Dum Dum", etc...) have been shuffled around and separated so they have less influence over the organization. Heck, Dum-Dum and Gabriel Jones have been reduced to leading field teams, and Valentina's been shunted to a desk-jockey position in Europe.

Hill may or may not be corrupt herself (I'm leaning towards "not" because making her as unlikeable as they have makes "corrupt" too easy of an out for the writers), but she's clearly trying to rule SHIELD with an iron fist, and wants to "rule" the superheroes the same way. Plus she's likely so focused on -that- that she might be missing corruption going on within her organization.

Anyway, accountability for Heroes isn't a bad thing, nor is training, but "drafting" them into SHIELD and offering a gulag in the Negative Zone as the only alternative kills the whole deal for me.

[scottv]

I think that it is because Cap is from a diferent era. He saw first hand what happened when personal freedom was taken away from a select group of people just because they were different. He understands that governments don't always have the people in mind when they make their laws and lastly Cap doesn't just follow blindly... **cough cough Spider-man cough**


For all those Spider-Man fans out there, I am a huge SM fan but right now he is really annoying me.

[Nomad]

Didn't cap go to pym after he hill ordeal? I think IM is too connected in this mattr. Pym turned him down and set the pace for cap's renegade situation. He DID go to the avengers. didn't the cap NA issue take place right after cw1?

[Kyle_Ion]

Iron Man's a great character and the law has -some- good points, but as it stands I can't agree with it, mostly because of SHIELD's involvement.

They've made it pretty clear that all the "good eggs" that were Fury's loyal "inner circle" (Like the Contessa, "Dum Dum", etc...) have been shuffled around and separated so they have less influence over the organization. Heck, Dum-Dum and Gabriel Jones have been reduced to leading field teams, and Valentina's been shunted to a desk-jockey position in Europe.

Hill may or may not be corrupt herself (I'm leaning towards "not" because making her as unlikeable as they have makes "corrupt" too easy of an out for the writers), but she's clearly trying to rule SHIELD with an iron fist, and wants to "rule" the superheroes the same way. Plus she's likely so focused on -that- that she might be missing corruption going on within her organization.






Anyway, accountability for Heroes isn't a bad thing, nor is training, but "drafting" them into SHIELD and offering a gulag in the Negative Zone as the only alternative kills the whole deal for me.




I'm sorry I just can't stand Iron Man, and I don't like the idea that the superheros will have to work for the government and or shield. The superheroes don't need training they've been doing what they've been doing for however long they have been heroes, and like some people have said that if or when they end up joining the government then the government will tell them who the bad guys are. No one should tell the heros who the villians are and I think that what the government is doing is wrong, as far as I know no innocent bystanders have ever got hurt except for now with the young wanna be heros.

[bulbasteve]

I give you the American Declaration of Independence.

You don't "throw off such Government" by having a sit-in at the Washington monument.

The United States is in existance as a country because they DID act violently and they DID stand up for themselves when the laws were unjust and the government wouldn't listen.

Perhaps having the entire quote would help you:

"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. ?Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world."

Now come on, I know it's very popular to hate this administration, but to call it absolute despotism is absured. We are in the most open and democratic country in the world, and to think that people would advocate violence above working within the system doesn't seem to show a good understanding of American history.

[Jmacq1]

Well, I don't think anyone's advocating violent overthrow of the government in the -real world-. Just in the fictional Marvel Universe. ;)

Given how incompetent/corrupt they've been portrayed in the past, it might not be entirely unwarranted.

But all they really have to "overthrow" is SHIELD.

[Tommy]

Well, I don't think anyone's advocating violent overthrow of the government in the -real world-. Just in the fictional Marvel Universe. ;)

Given how incompetent/corrupt they've been portrayed in the past, it might not be entirely unwarranted.

But all they really have to "overthrow" is SHIELD.
Isn't that what they did in Squadron Supreme? And we all know what a happy love fest that was.

[Jmacq1]

Isn't that what they did in Squadron Supreme? And we all know what a happy love fest that was.

True, but if you look at the classic "Squadron Supreme", the -Pro-Reg- side is acting a lot more like the Squadron did than the Anti-Reg side.

The Anti-Reg side is (surprise, surprise) looking a lot more like "The Redeemers".

[XPac]

True, but if you look at the classic "Squadron Supreme", the -Pro-Reg- side is acting a lot more like the Squadron did than the Anti-Reg side.

The Anti-Reg side is (surprise, surprise) looking a lot more like "The Redeemers".

I think both this and Squadron Supreme show the need to have checks and balances.

You need a strong government and military to ensure that the heroes don't get out of hand. But at the same time, checks and balances need to exist to ensure elements of the government can be stood up to if necesary.

The corrupt SHIELD we've seen this past year is exactly why we need heroes outside of SHIELDS direct control out there. They don't need to be actively trying to take SHIELD down like the Squadron... they just need to exist in case there's that need.

[The Shadow]

Perhaps having the entire quote would help you
Not really... I just chose the part most relevant to what I think Cap would believe.

Now come on, I know it's very popular to hate this administration, but to call it absolute despotism is absured.
I'm talking about the pretend Marvel Universe... not the real US Government.

Despotism can also be in the form of an oligarchy. An oligarchy (if you don't know) is a form of government where most or all political power effectively rests with a small segment of society (typically the most powerful, whether by wealth, family, military strength, or political influence). Sounds like Bush and his friends to me ;)

We are in the most open and democratic country in the world
I dont know about that... I think Canada is a much more open and democratic country than the States. This is not a slam on the US.

Canada made slavery illegal in 1793. The US did it officially in 1865.
Canada had women voting as early as 1883 with full voting in 1918. The US wasn't until 1920 for all women (though Wyoming, not a state at the time, had some women voting in 1869).
Canada is much more liberal with its policies allowing its people more freedoms (gay marrage, medical marijuana etc.), our religious tollerance and so on.

Again this isn't a slam on the US! I just disagree with your asertion that the US is the most open and democratic country in the world... I could go on, especially about your givernment today and how "open" they are... but I wanted to address your below point about a lack of American historical knowlegde.

and to think that people would advocate violence above working within the system doesn't seem to show a good understanding of American history.
War of Independance, War if 1812, Civil War, Iran Contra Affair, alledged assisinations of foreign leaders (despite a presedential ban on them), the civil rights movement, the KKK, the second Gulf War.

There are TONS of instances where violence was used by people instead of working within the system. Look at the civil rights movement... black people (despite the 13th Amendment being passed in 1865, the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment, the 15th Amendment allowing everyone to vote) were treated like second class citizens for almost 120 years. Integration in the south didn't go so well into the 1970's and black people STILL aren't accorded the same rights as white people: case in point Rodney King.

Working within the system would have been no invasion of Iraq... it would have went through the UN fully instead of ignoring what the weapons inspectors said.

My knowledge of American history (despite being a Canadian) is quite good.

[bulbasteve]

Not really... I just chose the part most relevant to what I think Cap would believe.

I'm talking about the pretend Marvel Universe... not the real US Government.

Despotism can also be in the form of an oligarchy. An oligarchy (if you don't know) is a form of government where most or all political power effectively rests with a small segment of society (typically the most powerful, whether by wealth, family, military strength, or political influence). Sounds like Bush and his friends to me ;)

Perhapes you still have not read the section in question. It is talking about "absolute Despotism", "absolute Tyranny", as in all power residing. Now come on, we have the media and the courts, who pound at the administration left and right... hell term limits and elections, we won't even have Bush in a few years. So what, Cap doesn't watch CNN or know that a Supreme Court exists?

I dont know about that... I think Canada is a much more open and democratic country than the States. This is not a slam on the US.

Ah, here I am talking about the constitution with a guy whoes country didn't have a bill of rights till the 60s.

War of Independance, War if 1812, Civil War, Iran Contra Affair, alledged assisinations of foreign leaders (despite a presedential ban on them), the civil rights movement, the KKK, the second Gulf War.

There are TONS of instances where violence was used by people instead of working within the system. Look at the civil rights movement... black people (despite the 13th Amendment being passed in 1865, the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment, the 15th Amendment allowing everyone to vote) were treated like second class citizens for almost 120 years. Integration in the south didn't go so well into the 1970's and black people STILL aren't accorded the same rights as white people: case in point Rodney King.

Working within the system would have been no invasion of Iraq... it would have went through the UN fully instead of ignoring what the weapons inspectors said.

My knowledge of American history (despite being a Canadian) is quite good.

But...you were JUST arguing for a violent overthrow of the government. Now you are saying violence is bad and we should work within the system.

[Jmacq1]

Hint: There's a real world and a make-believe Marvel Universe world. It's OK to believe one thing about one and another about the other.

Example:

I think trying to overthrow the real-world US government by force would be a bad, bad thing, not to mention nigh-insane. 99.9999999999999+% of the time, people should do everything in their power to work within the system.

But the Marvel Universe US government? Let it burn, baby. It's been almost as much a "supervillain" as any other evil character in the MU. And hey, if DC can let Lex Luthor be President for a few years, why can't Marvel let Cap or Iron Man do it?

[Alcoholic]

Cap should be pro-reg considering what he said to the Hulk in either #405 or #406

Hulk (punching out Doc Samson): Its about friendship and loyalty. If I have to decide between what's right and what's legal, I'll take what's right every time.
Captain America (throws his shield at Hulk): That's not your choice to make, Doctor!
Hulk: Captain, you of all people should know...(hits the ground and sends Cap flying) there's always a choice! Because this is America!

[The Shadow]

Ah, here I am talking about the constitution with a guy whoes country didn't have a bill of rights till the 60s.
We didn't need one unlike our neighbours to the south ;)

But...you were JUST arguing for a violent overthrow of the government. Now you are saying violence is bad and we should work within the system.
No, I was saying that I think Cap would fight against the government against what he percieves as injustices. The peaceful sit-in (where my quoting of the Decleration came in) isn't effective. Sure it gets some sound bites on TV, but its effectiveness is limited.

Look at Ms. Sheehan's protests against Bush and the war. What has she accomplished? Absolutly nothing. I'm not saying Ms Sheehan should start a militia and overthrows the government as that would be impossible in this day and age... but supporting Bush's opponents (financially or in advertising) would hurt a lot more than her sitting outside his Texas ranch.

[jackolover]

The corrupt SHIELD we've seen this past year is exactly why we need heroes outside of SHIELDS direct control out there. They don't need to be actively trying to take SHIELD down like the Squadron... they just need to exist in case there's that need.

I don't think Shield has anything to do with it. Shield is just an arm of government that has to do what it's told. Shield is the only one best situated to deal with implementing the SHRA, because they know capes. What do you want the government to use? Some wishy washy beauracracy, to intervue capes and oversee SHRA? It wouldn't get done. Forget Shield. Is the SHRA valid or not? And is the SHRA being implimented? It sure is.

[jackolover]

"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. ?Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world."

From the reading of this dictum, you can judge either the anti or the pro sides to fit the " But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government".

My whole position comes down to this - have the common people in the MU suffered now that the SHRA is being enacted? If the answer is no, then the Government doesn't need changing. I think the humans are being well served here. (Mind you, the freedom of the press is a little concerning - it is kind of Lincolnesk).

But who knows. Maybe you have to forbid some civil rights to force the implementation of the SHRA, much like the Laws post 9/11.

[The Shadow]

From the reading of this dictum, you can judge either the anti or the pro sides to fit the " But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government".
That was why I quoted pretty much that exact point.

My whole position comes down to this - have the common people in the MU suffered now that the SHRA is being enacted? If the answer is no, then the Government doesn't need changing.
Why do you have to be "common" to have suffered? Don't you think Peter has suffered because of his decision to don a costume? The Constitution and Decleration don't pick and choose who is or is not included... they include everyone regardless of race, creed, sex etc.

[XPac]

I don't think Shield has anything to do with it. Shield is just an arm of government that has to do what it's told. Shield is the only one best situated to deal with implementing the SHRA, because they know capes. What do you want the government to use? Some wishy washy beauracracy, to intervue capes and oversee SHRA? It wouldn't get done. Forget Shield. Is the SHRA valid or not? And is the SHRA being implimented? It sure is.

Technically SHIELD is an arm of the United Nations and has no actual business enforcing laws of the US government. So if you're asking what the government should use, I'd probably argue some branch within US jurisdiction.

And truthfully YES I do think beuracracy should be involved. I say let it be a slow process where its debated rather than a bill that's quickly hotshotted through COngress because the media is hyping up this years flavor of the month event.

If SHIELD didn't get involved, Cap wouldn't have been attacked and wouldn't have needed to go underground. He could have publically gave his side the same as Tony, and after months and months of slow beuroacracy the bill could be voted on.

For something like this, which can cause a radical shift in policy, the slower it's implemented the better. And the more likely Civil Wars are averted. That of course is not the way to write a comicbook but if you're genuinely asking how it SHOULD be done, then it should involve the beaurocracy and not the military. Military shouldn't be involved one way or another until AFTER the law is passed.

[XPac]

My whole position comes down to this - have the common people in the MU suffered now that the SHRA is being enacted? If the answer is no, then the Government doesn't need changing. I think the humans are being well served here. (Mind you, the freedom of the press is a little concerning - it is kind of Lincolnesk).

But who knows. Maybe you have to forbid some civil rights to force the implementation of the SHRA, much like the Laws post 9/11.

The common people aren't suffering... but they are paying millions (perhaps even billions if everything Tony wants is implemented) in tax dollors for a service that the heroes had previously supplied for free.

[jackolover]

That was why I quoted pretty much that exact point.


Why do you have to be "common" to have suffered? Don't you think Peter has suffered because of his decision to don a costume? The Constitution and Decleration don't pick and choose who is or is not included... they include everyone regardless of race, creed, sex etc.


Unfortunately, the SHRA was set up so the common people benefit, albeit to the discomfort of the capes, so Peter? It's going to be tough.

[jackolover]

Technically SHIELD is an arm of the United Nations and has no actual business enforcing laws of the US government. So if you're asking what the government should use, I'd probably argue some branch within US jurisdiction.

I know, technically, Shield shouldn't get involved, but they have been called upon to do this, so I don't see a problem, even if it is juresdiction sensitive.


And truthfully YES I do think beuracracy should be involved. I say let it be a slow process where its debated rather than a bill that's quickly hotshotted through COngress because the media is hyping up this years flavor of the month event.

If SHIELD didn't get involved, Cap wouldn't have been attacked and wouldn't have needed to go underground. He could have publically gave his side the same as Tony, and after months and months of slow beuroacracy the bill could be voted on.

For something like this, which can cause a radical shift in policy, the slower it's implemented the better. And the more likely Civil Wars are averted. That of course is not the way to write a comicbook but if you're genuinely asking how it SHOULD be done, then it should involve the beaurocracy and not the military. Military shouldn't be involved one way or another until AFTER the law is passed.

No, I am not asking genuinely if, in real life, SHRA were to be carried out. I'm saying, carrying it out in the MU.

And as for the slow process versus the quick process, I put it to you that after 9/11, there was no messing around, when laws had to change. They just got up and did it. But you're right. If you tried to implement it in the real world, I would want the SHRA coming in slowly, and not with the military either. The military are cold machines that move in straight lines and would trample over anybody who resisted. Luckily, the MU armed forces were not invoked, or you would get more than just a little civil liberties bent, as Shield have been doing. You would get houses blown up, air attacks, and maybe house to house searches, with colaborators arrested. It's not a good alternative.

[jackolover]

The common people aren't suffering... but they are paying millions (perhaps even billions if everything Tony wants is implemented) in tax dollors for a service that the heroes had previously supplied for free.

This never came up before, but you're right! It must be costing squillions. I guess the MU citizens must pay a whole lot more taxes than we do, or this whole thing would just grind to a halt. Maybe, the monetory benefits as a result of the capes, flows down to the common folks.

[XPac]

This never came up before, but you're right! It must be costing squillions. I guess the MU citizens must pay a whole lot more taxes than we do, or this whole thing would just grind to a halt. Maybe, the monetory benefits as a result of the capes, flows down to the common folks.

Yeah, it Stark plans on putting a Hall of Justice (old Superfriends reference) in every state, it'll be pricey. Funny how Start was a guy that ended the Avengers when he couldn't afford it, but now that it's not his money he's going in all four cylinders.

In places like NY, it's probably a good investment since you have giant killer Doombots attacking them every Tuesday. With all the property damage they get on a weekly basis, any money spent on making it safer totally makes it worth it. But I suspect placing an Avengers base in Alaska, where a villian may show up once every 30 years will likely be an unecessariy drain in their local reasources.

I think if you put it in a real life context, Tony's plans seem a bit too grand and splinters too much of the superhero community. Tony should spend a few bucks to get cable TV... watching a few Justice League Unlimited reruns might give him a few ideas (though admittedly that sort of ended up badly too).

[bulbasteve]

From the reading of this dictum, you can judge either the anti or the pro sides to fit the " But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government".

My whole position comes down to this - have the common people in the MU suffered now that the SHRA is being enacted? If the answer is no, then the Government doesn't need changing. I think the humans are being well served here. (Mind you, the freedom of the press is a little concerning - it is kind of Lincolnesk).

But who knows. Maybe you have to forbid some civil rights to force the implementation of the SHRA, much like the Laws post 9/11.

Unless you see some absolute depotism you can't judge either to fit it. Unless Bush declared himself King and Iron Man and the superheroes his stormtroopers, it just won't fit.

For something like this, which can cause a radical shift in policy, the slower it's implemented the better. And the more likely Civil Wars are averted. That of course is not the way to write a comicbook but if you're genuinely asking how it SHOULD be done, then it should involve the beaurocracy and not the military. Military shouldn't be involved one way or another until AFTER the law is passed.

SHIELD is not the military. And aside from which the "military" wasn't used until after the law was signed (remember it took a couple of weeks between the law being passed and the President signing it). The only action was with SHIELD and Cap, and since Cap was by his own admission an agent of SHIELD it had nothing to do with the law itself.

This never came up before, but you're right! It must be costing squillions. I guess the MU citizens must pay a whole lot more taxes than we do, or this whole thing would just grind to a halt. Maybe, the monetory benefits as a result of the capes, flows down to the common folks.

Maybe in the short term. But remember you got supers on the government payroll. That means an electrical or nuclear superhero could come in a few hours a day and power a city. You have the added tech and scientific knowhow of Stark, Pym and Richards which should cut costs and add some money to the system. Not to mention teleporters (the people and the technology) and reality warpers who would probably put the entire system in the green by themselves.

[XPac]

SHIELD is not the military. And aside from which the "military" wasn't used until after the law was signed (remember it took a couple of weeks between the law being passed and the President signing it). The only action was with SHIELD and Cap, and since Cap was by his own admission an agent of SHIELD it had nothing to do with the law itself.




Yes... SHIELD did that one thing. And that one thing basically started the Civil War. I stand by my opinion that things would have worked out far better had SHIELD not decided to get involved in anything until AFTER the registration as made into a law.

[bulbasteve]

Yes... SHIELD did that one thing. And that one thing basically started the Civil War. I stand by my opinion that things would have worked out far better had SHIELD not decided to get involved in anything until AFTER the registration as made into a law.

So what does that have to do with the military? You said "That of course is not the way to write a comicbook but if you're genuinely asking how it SHOULD be done, then it should involve the beaurocracy and not the military." The beaurocracy the original poster and you are talking about is a government one...so when did the U.S military do ANYTHING?

[XPac]

So what does that have to do with the military? You said "That of course is not the way to write a comicbook but if you're genuinely asking how it SHOULD be done, then it should involve the beaurocracy and not the military." The beaurocracy the original poster and you are talking about is a government one...so when did the U.S military do ANYTHING?

The US military didn't do anything... SHIELD did. And I consider SHIELD a military organziation, even if it's not a US one (which is all the more reason why it shouldn't be involved whatsoever).

And they started a war because of it. They're involved for like 3 minutes, and a rebellion is created 3 minutes after that. Hill should have stuck her nose out of it and waited until the law was passed. But she didn't, and this occured. Of course, maybe this is exactly what she wanted all long, as it did benefit her in the long run. Either way, I think things would have turned out better had they not played any sort of role at that stage.

[bulbasteve]

The US military didn't do anything... SHIELD did. And I consider SHIELD a military organziation, even if it's not a US one (which is all the more reason why it shouldn't be involved whatsoever).

And they started a war because of it. They're involved for like 3 minutes, and a rebellion is created 3 minutes after that. Hill should have stuck her nose out of it and waited until the law was passed. But she didn't, and this occured. Of course, maybe this is exactly what she wanted all long, as it did benefit her in the long run. Either way, I think things would have turned out better had they not played any sort of role at that stage.

Then what bureaucracy are you talking about? SHIELD? U.S? It wouldn't make much sense for SHIELD to have a lot of internal debate. And we saw in ASM that there were debates abou the act in Congress and Stark helping to shape the law long before Stamford.

As for what started the war. Hill just gave a direct order to an agent of SHIELD. He is the one who disobeyed orders, and didn't resign from SHIELD much earlier...

[XPac]

Then what bureaucracy are you talking about? SHIELD? U.S? It wouldn't make much sense for SHIELD to have a lot of internal debate. And we saw in ASM that there were debates abou the act in Congress and Stark helping to shape the law long before Stamford.

As for what started the war. Hill just gave a direct order to an agent of SHIELD. He is the one who disobeyed orders, and didn't resign from SHIELD much earlier...

I'm talking about the US bureacracy. A different post argued against bureaucrats handling the registraion, and I was arguing that's exactly what they are there for.

As for Hill's actions... I am still of the believe that things would be better off if Hill had stayed out of it. If you feel otherwise, we can agree to disagree.

[jackolover]

Unless you see some absolute depotism you can't judge either to fit it. Unless Bush declared himself King and Iron Man and the superheroes his stormtroopers, it just won't fit.

Thats up to opinion, what can be termed absolute despotism. In CW the action taken by the authorities, from the capes standpoint, is not very supportive. You might say. it was brutal. Not to say action taken by governments are not brutal. Take the action by Australia to isolate refugees off the mainland. So Fantasy Island. But we are less likely to condemn the government for that action, because we allow the authorities some leeway to protect our borders and our immigration policy. So, painting things as Absolute despotism does have hairs on it.


Maybe in the short term. But remember you got supers on the government payroll. That means an electrical or nuclear superhero could come in a few hours a day and power a city. You have the added tech and scientific knowhow of Stark, Pym and Richards which should cut costs and add some money to the system. Not to mention teleporters (the people and the technology) and reality warpers who would probably put the entire system in the green by themselves.


bulbasteve, you are really thinking outside the square, here. We haven't seen this kind of cooperation as you mentioned, but why not? Hell. The United League of Accumulative Powers would be some power utility! You could have.....

[AllisterH]

I think that it is because Cap is from a diferent era. He saw first hand what happened when personal freedom was taken away from a select group of people just because they were different. He understands that governments don't always have the people in mind when they make their laws and lastly Cap doesn't just follow blindly... **cough cough Spider-man cough**


.

The anger over the draft portion makes no sense then since Captain America as a product of the WWII would support the DRAFT (unless you're going to tell me that Captain america is against the DRAFT) and the real life draft makes the SHRA look like the ACLU's wet dream.

So again, why is Cap so anti-reg? That's one of the reasons why I actually think Cap being so anti (and not even considering the pro-position) makes no sense. The real life draft and the current day Selective services does EXACTLY what you listed above yet I can't see ANYONE from the 40s not being in favour of the DRAFT.

[XPac]

The anger over the draft portion makes no sense then since Captain America as a product of the WWII would support the DRAFT (unless you're going to tell me that Captain america is against the DRAFT) and the real life draft makes the SHRA look like the ACLU's wet dream.

So again, why is Cap so anti-reg? That's one of the reasons why I actually think Cap being so anti (and not even considering the pro-position) makes no sense. The real life draft and the current day Selective services does EXACTLY what you listed above yet I can't see ANYONE from the 40s not being in favour of the DRAFT.

I don't see why it's so confusing that Cap would be against the registration. The entire year prior to the registration builds up SHIELD to be this corrupt organization. Now that organization is being placed in charge of the entire superhero community. It makes sense that he'd be against that.

[scottv]

The anger over the draft portion makes no sense then since Captain America as a product of the WWII would support the DRAFT (unless you're going to tell me that Captain america is against the DRAFT) and the real life draft makes the SHRA look like the ACLU's wet dream.

So again, why is Cap so anti-reg? That's one of the reasons why I actually think Cap being so anti (and not even considering the pro-position) makes no sense. The real life draft and the current day Selective services does EXACTLY what you listed above yet I can't see ANYONE from the 40s not being in favour of the DRAFT.


I wasn't talking about the draft when I said that, I was talking about those people who were repressed by the NAZIs that Cap was very much against. I think that the SHRA takes away the Superhumans right to privicy, which would be another reason that Cap would be against it because it goes against the Bill of Rights.

[bulbasteve]

I wasn't talking about the draft when I said that, I was talking about those people who were repressed by the NAZIs that Cap was very much against. I think that the SHRA takes away the Superhumans right to privicy, which would be another reason that Cap would be against it because it goes against the Bill of Rights.

I really wouldn't complain about the government in the MU taking away the right to privacy. The supers have psychics who pull a lot of questionable stuff against people all the time.

[Emperor Reagan]

I really wouldn't complain about the government in the MU taking away the right to privacy. The supers have psychics who pull a lot of questionable stuff against people all the time.

That's not a very good argument.

It's ok for the government to ignore the right to privacy because some individuals do?

[bulbasteve]

That's not a very good argument.

It's ok for the government to ignore the right to privacy because some individuals do?

Because they do it all the time. Heck they had to pry information on House of M out of spideys brain. You gotta remember the government doesn't really know Xavior is really a find and dandy guy, they probably think he is tricking them into thinking that. I'm surprised they haven't done much worse than Sentinals and registration acts.

[The Shadow]

I wasn't talking about the draft when I said that, I was talking about those people who were repressed by the NAZIs that Cap was very much against.
And then there were the Japanese Americans put in internment camps in WW2 as well.

[BigBoss]

what I wanna know is how long did cap know about sheilds corruption if they are? that could be the reason why he is so anti.

[The Shadow]

what I wanna know is how long did cap know about sheilds corruption if they are? that could be the reason why he is so anti.
I would guess during the first New Avengers arc when SHIELD tried to bomb his ass back to the States.

That would get most people pissed.

[Karthak]

Quote from wikipedia: He considers himself dedicated to defending America's ideals rather than its political leadership, a conviction Captain America sums up when confronted by an army general who attempts to manipulate him by appealing to his loyalty: Rogers responds, "I'm loyal to nothing, General ... except the Dream".

That sums up the main reason why he is ant-reg rather nicely. The registration thing is in direct opposition to all he believes in.

[jackolover]

Quote from wikipedia: He considers himself dedicated to defending America's ideals rather than its political leadership, a conviction Captain America sums up when confronted by an army general who attempts to manipulate him by appealing to his loyalty: Rogers responds, "I'm loyal to nothing, General ... except the Dream".

That sums up the main reason why he is ant-reg rather nicely. The registration thing is in direct opposition to all he believes in.

So what is this Dream that Steve Rogers is dedicated too?

Is it the intension that General Washington and the freedom fighters had? That would be to have an independant, run by the people country, full of various races.

Is it the intension of those forming the constitution? That would be laws and the running of the country.

Or is it Steve Rogers personal dream? Has 'Captain America' gone to his head, or, did the 'Captain America' that was created in that laboratory in his origin story, have his own vision, independant of everybody elses. If so, is he wrong?

I think Steve Rogers has his own personal 'Dream' that many people have taken up, because of disenchantment with the government, politicians, the system, all sorts of corruption that seems to have set in. I think Steve has put up with the Bull S**t until this day in CW. He can let just about anything else go, but not this Registration thing, which I think Steve feels is like corroding basic freedoms. Not neccesarily the SHRA in itself, because that law has redeeming qualities. But the fact that it starts a trend. A trend that leads to other laws hastily formulated, merely for the convenience of solving an immediate problem, without any thought or debate, to reign in any maverick practices.

[bulbasteve]

Quote from wikipedia: He considers himself dedicated to defending America's ideals rather than its political leadership, a conviction Captain America sums up when confronted by an army general who attempts to manipulate him by appealing to his loyalty: Rogers responds, "I'm loyal to nothing, General ... except the Dream".

That sums up the main reason why he is ant-reg rather nicely. The registration thing is in direct opposition to all he believes in.

Here I thought the American Dream and it's ideals was a government "by, for, and of the people" and "liberty in law" and all that stuff. Now personally I never figured the American dream was about anarchy but I guess to Cap it is.

Or is it Steve Rogers personal dream? Has 'Captain America' gone to his head, or, did the 'Captain America' that was created in that laboratory in his origin story, have his own vision, independant of everybody elses. If so, is he wrong?

Heh, according the Earth X the supersoldier program was actually secretly a Nazi one...so there you go. Damn that really should be in continuity, come on blond haired blue eyed peak of human physicality?!

[XPac]

Here I thought the American Dream and it's ideals was a government "by, for, and of the people" and "liberty in law" and all that stuff. Now personally I never figured the American dream was about anarchy but I guess to Cap it is.

Respecting the rights of the individual is not the same thing as anarchy. There's a difference. Captain America doesn't support the notion of NO laws... there are plenty that I'm sure Cap would be perfectly fine with.

Disagreeing with a law you feel is unjust hardly equates to disagreeing with the existance of laws in general.

[jackolover]

Heh, according the Earth X the supersoldier program was actually secretly a Nazi one...so there you go. Damn that really should be in continuity, come on blond haired blue eyed peak of human physicality?!

I hadn't realised in Earth X the super soldier program was NAZI. Where did it state that, can you remember?

[XPac]

Heh, according the Earth X the supersoldier program was actually secretly a Nazi one...so there you go. Damn that really should be in continuity, come on blond haired blue eyed peak of human physicality?!

It's true, Steve is sort of the nazi ideal. Hell, you can even take that a step further. Ever consider what it would be like walking around Avengers mansion with their masks are off? Steve Rogers, Clint Barton, Hank Pym, Donald Blake, Mar-Vell... when the Nazi's envisioned what the perfect world looked like, they no doubt envisioned the freanking Avengers.

To this day, I'm still half convinced when Jan slept with Clint, it was an honest mistake. Clint, Hank, Steve... who the heck can tell the difference.

[bulbasteve]

Respecting the rights of the individual is not the same thing as anarchy. There's a difference. Captain America doesn't support the notion of NO laws... there are plenty that I'm sure Cap would be perfectly fine with.

Disagreeing with a law you feel is unjust hardly equates to disagreeing with the existance of laws in general.

He is doing a bit more than disagreeing, don't you think?

I hadn't realised in Earth X the super soldier program was NAZI. Where did it state that, can you remember?

Universe X Cap special. It wasn't actually a Nazi program. They figured the best way to get their projects done and not have the allies stop them was to install some of their own men into American programs. So Reinstein was actually a Nazi, the assassin was meant to kill Cap but accidentally killed the doctor instead. Red Skull revealed the fact to Cap (damn cool scene!), and then Cap went and killed him out of revenge. Good stuff, better portrayal of cap and his views on killing and the american dream and all that than in most showings.

They kinda blow over most of the time how he killed that Spy the very minute he became Cap when he really didn't have to outright kill him. That's a pretty good indication that Cap had a tendency to let his power go to his head.

[XPac]

He is doing a bit more than disagreeing, don't you think?



That's true... he's demonstrating civil disobeidience to the highest order. I'm merely arguing that he's not condoning or supporting anarchy. So argue that's his vision of the american dream really isn't fair.

[bulbasteve]

That's true... he's demonstrating civil disobeidience to the highest order. I'm merely arguing that he's not condoning or supporting anarchy. So argue that's his vision of the american dream really isn't fair.

Maybe NAZI civil disobedience :p

The definition of civil disobedience is that it is non-violent. So unless anarchy or rebellion or whatever you choose to call it is the highest form then it doesn't work.

[jackolover]

Universe X Cap special. It wasn't actually a Nazi program. They figured the best way to get their projects done and not have the allies stop them was to install some of their own men into American programs. So Reinstein was actually a Nazi, the assassin was meant to kill Cap but accidentally killed the doctor instead. Red Skull revealed the fact to Cap (damn cool scene!), and then Cap went and killed him out of revenge. Good stuff, better portrayal of cap and his views on killing and the american dream and all that than in most showings.

They kinda blow over most of the time how he killed that Spy the very minute he became Cap when he really didn't have to outright kill him. That's a pretty good indication that Cap had a tendency to let his power go to his head.

Thanks for the info, bulbasteve.

[jackolover]

Here I thought the American Dream and it's ideals was a government "by, for, and of the people" and "liberty in law" and all that stuff. Now personally I never figured the American dream was about anarchy but I guess to Cap it is.

I also disagree, that you would stretch the point and say Steve Rogers is an anarchist. He is just using actions to convey his point because he's an action hero, whereas most people do not use that medium, because they are just common folks, so protests are more suited. But Cap is dealing with an issue particularly concerning his industry, and he has to resist it against super powered enforces. He is not going to go out with a protest banner, saying,

"Stark is a D**k head", and "You can keep your Registration up your a**".

Steve has to resist the SHRA movement in the way these people operate. By action.

And you can equate this resistance of the anti-reg faction, to the basic unlawfullness of the British Government, in the war of Independance. It sat just as uncomfortably in the belly of the colonists, as the SHRA sits with super heros. It's being forced on the heros, instead of there being a process of dealing with it in cooperation with the law makers.

(But hell, I'm pro-reg now. What am I arguing for?)

[John Doe Jnr]

Cap would of been fine with the reigsteration if Hill didn't ask him if he could handle any of the anti-registers. Thats like having your father's boss tell your father to come beat you and arrest you for saving people.

[jackolover]

Cap would of been fine with the reigsteration if Hill didn't ask him if he could handle any of the anti-registers. Thats like having your father's boss tell your father to come beat you and arrest you for saving people.

Now, I don't think that would be a trigger point for Steve to go ballistic, although he did. I think, even if Hill left him alone, Steve would still have used armed resistance, in this case. I think the very idea the SHRA was suggesting, was against everything he had ever fought for. Freedom to opperate as a responsible hero, and, not having a law shoved down your throat.

[XPac]

Now, I don't think that would be a trigger point for Steve to go ballistic, although he did. I think, even if Hill left him alone, Steve would still have used armed resistance, in this case. I think the very idea the SHRA was suggesting, was against everything he had ever fought for. Freedom to opperate as a responsible hero, and, not having a law shoved down your throat.

The thing is because of Hill, we'll never know.

MAYBE if Cap had been given a chance to fight the bill out in the open prior to the bill becoming a law (ie talking to the press, speaking before congress, etc), MAYBE he wouldn't have gotten to the point where he used violence. Maybe. It's even possilbe he might not have needed to at all... who knows what could have happened if Cap wasn't forced underground. He might have been able to fight the bill, though admittedly it probably had too much momentum.

We'll never know exactly how Cap would have reacted had he not been forced to fight for himself 5 seconds after Hill talked to him.

[jackolover]

The thing is because of Hill, we'll never know.

MAYBE if Cap had been given a chance to fight the bill out in the open prior to the bill becoming a law (ie talking to the press, speaking before congress, etc), MAYBE he wouldn't have gotten to the point where he used violence. Maybe. It's even possilbe he might not have needed to at all... who knows what could have happened if Cap wasn't forced underground. He might have been able to fight the bill, though admittedly it probably had too much momentum.

We'll never know exactly how Cap would have reacted had he not been forced to fight for himself 5 seconds after Hill talked to him.

Agreed. If the bill hadn't been forced through so quick, and there was consultation with the capes, I think this whole thing CW could have been avoided.

[Nomad]

Anarchy? Cap's resistance is not even close, be serious here. It's like some people don't even read Civil War. Cap and Co. oppose this law, and have no choice of protesting it besides incarceration, violence, or cooperation. Incarceration is like surrender, violence is unfortunate and devastating to the hero community, and cooperation is compromising to cap's integrity. Sure Cap is proud and thick-headed. Iron man is devious and underhanded. It's damned if I do, damned if I don't, for Captain America. You don't think Iron Man would try to censor him if he allowed himself to be captured? Maria Hill didn't take "no" for an answer when Cap dissented. What should he have done? Attacked heroes, (which he believes is wrong), or get arrested and hope that this blows over. He would have had to completely trust this woman who was ready to use force against him for disagreeing. Why would Tony hide this law from Steve? Just ask yourself, "why?"

[bulbasteve]

The thing is because of Hill, we'll never know.

MAYBE if Cap had been given a chance to fight the bill out in the open prior to the bill becoming a law (ie talking to the press, speaking before congress, etc), MAYBE he wouldn't have gotten to the point where he used violence. Maybe. It's even possilbe he might not have needed to at all... who knows what could have happened if Cap wasn't forced underground. He might have been able to fight the bill, though admittedly it probably had too much momentum.

We'll never know exactly how Cap would have reacted had he not been forced to fight for himself 5 seconds after Hill talked to him.

No, if Cap retired after what happened with Fury or the stuff he saw Hill doing before the act went in, or right there with Hill then we could see what he might have done otherwise.

If Cap wants to not follow orders then he shouldn't be part of a system where you have to. Other heroes worked fine without being even independent agents of SHIELD.

Now, I don't think that would be a trigger point for Steve to go ballistic, although he did. I think, even if Hill left him alone, Steve would still have used armed resistance, in this case. I think the very idea the SHRA was suggesting, was against everything he had ever fought for. Freedom to opperate as a responsible hero, and, not having a law shoved down your throat.

Well to him it is. Although I would have to question a guy who thinks WWII or a super soldier program had anything to do with people being responsible heroes. He worked with a clean conscious for a country who at the time had a draft and was sending Japanese citizens into internment camps, didn't see him using any armed resistance then.

So what...he had more moral relativism back in WWII than he does now? So he actually has become MORE black and white than he was when he off fighting Nazis.

[XPac]

If Cap wants to not follow orders then he shouldn't be part of a system where you have to. Other heroes worked fine without being even independent agents of SHIELD.



And truthfully Cap would work fine without being independepent agent of SHIELD too. Most of the time, he works with them when they need HIS help rather than the other way around.

Ideally, Cap could have been a nice bridge between SHIELD and the superhero community to prevent things like Civil War from happening. And it's possible had Fury been in charge rather than Maria Hill, that would have been the case.

[Nomad]

Well to him it is. Although I would have to question a guy who thinks WWII or a super soldier program had anything to do with people being responsible heroes. He worked with a clean conscious for a country who at the time had a draft and was sending Japanese citizens into internment camps, didn't see him using any armed resistance then.

So what...he had more moral relativism back in WWII than he does now? So he actually has become MORE black and white than he was when he off fighting Nazis.

Cap was in America sending Japanese to camps? Ouch. I thought he was over seas the whole time. But yes, cap has had time to reflect on blind loyalty to his gov't by now. Now he isn't a g-man. Unless, of course, you count SHIELD.

[jackolover]

Why would Tony hide this law from Steve? Just ask yourself, "why?"

Yeah. This came up with a previous poster.

I can only think of the extremis effecting Tony. He may be rid of it, but Extremis may have affected his brain.

Then, Tony may have connived with Richards and Pym, a sort of Illuminati, that they know best.

Otherwise, you have to think Tony knew what Cap would be like, about this SHRA capturing heros stuff, and kept it from him, fearing just what happened. If that's the case, Tony is immature and elitist, and at worst, a multinationalist - which is someone who thinks the world is made for them alone, and bugger the little people.

[jackolover]

Well to him it is. Although I would have to question a guy who thinks WWII or a super soldier program had anything to do with people being responsible heroes. He worked with a clean conscious for a country who at the time had a draft and was sending Japanese citizens into internment camps, didn't see him using any armed resistance then.

So what...he had more moral relativism back in WWII than he does now? So he actually has become MORE black and white than he was when he off fighting Nazis.

All I can say to that is that you would have to consider WW11 and the SHRA as 2 different things. A country at International war behaves differently to a domestic war. And we are not talking a threat to capes in WW11, but we are in SHRA. I think that explains it.

More moral relativism? Actually, when you think of the situation of Steve Rogers, he could have died taking that super soldier syrum. He put his life on the line and expected everyone in America to do the same

[XPac]

Well to him it is. Although I would have to question a guy who thinks WWII or a super soldier program had anything to do with people being responsible heroes. He worked with a clean conscious for a country who at the time had a draft and was sending Japanese citizens into internment camps, didn't see him using any armed resistance then.

So what...he had more moral relativism back in WWII than he does now? So he actually has become MORE black and white than he was when he off fighting Nazis.

It would be interesting to know Caps views on a lot of the less ethical things the US did during WW2.

That said, Cap had to pick his battles. Even if he knew about some of the things that were happening in the US, deciding to rise up against the US during a world war probably wouldn't have been terribly good an idea for anyone at the time.

I'll wager Cap woudln't have bothered fighting SHIELD had it been in the middle of the Kang Dynasty storyline for example. Things like world wars or intergalactic invasions probably take priority over taking stands against laws you don't believe it.

I've very possible he was more naive about US government during WW2. But it's also believable that he was a bit busy at the time... bigger more important battles needed to be fought. Had he been around at the end of the war, it's very possible he would have spoke out against some of the attrocities the US commited.

[Nomad]

By keeping Steve in the dark, Tony created a breach of trust. How do people on the boards keep saying that Steve should have trusted this man? That was a huge mistake. And Tony did it to Peter, which is even worse. Tony doesn't have a family, (or does he? Jarvis maybe), and peter does. Cap would have considered Tony family before the Civil War. Why would Tony let Agent Hill break the news? That seems off, and for years cap has avoided many villainous plots by sensing when things are amiss. The evidence is piling up, from Steve's perspective, anyway. Something is wrong with SHIELD, yet Tony is trusting them to hunt down his friends. Tony didn't even trust Steve enough to give him any warning. Now Tony tricks steve into a confrontation by preying off the better part of his character. Something is terribly wrong with Tony Stark. MAybe he's right, I don't know.He sure is acting like a Thunderbolt. Meanwhile, Baron Zemo is acting out-of-character, and while cap may see through it, everything is so f***ed right now, who can say? Tony will give Zemo the benefit of the doubt, but not Captain America? What gives?!

[bulbasteve]

It would be interesting to know Caps views on a lot of the less ethical things the US did during WW2.

That said, Cap had to pick his battles. Even if he knew about some of the things that were happening in the US, deciding to rise up against the US during a world war probably wouldn't have been terribly good an idea for anyone at the time.

I'll wager Cap woudln't have bothered fighting SHIELD had it been in the middle of the Kang Dynasty storyline for example. Things like world wars or intergalactic invasions probably take priority over taking stands against laws you don't believe it.

I've very possible he was more naive about US government during WW2. But it's also believable that he was a bit busy at the time... bigger more important battles needed to be fought. Had he been around at the end of the war, it's very possible he would have spoke out against some of the attrocities the US commited.

All very true. Also wondering if he would have taken the same action if there were still a million mutants in the U.S. or however many there were. At the very least his rebellion isn't all that big since there are relatively few supers around anymore.

[jackolover]

It would be interesting to know Caps views on a lot of the less ethical things the US did during WW2.

That said, Cap had to pick his battles. Even if he knew about some of the things that were happening in the US, deciding to rise up against the US during a world war probably wouldn't have been terribly good an idea for anyone at the time.

I'll wager Cap woudln't have bothered fighting SHIELD had it been in the middle of the Kang Dynasty storyline for example. Things like world wars or intergalactic invasions probably take priority over taking stands against laws you don't believe it.

I've very possible he was more naive about US government during WW2. But it's also believable that he was a bit busy at the time... bigger more important battles needed to be fought. Had he been around at the end of the war, it's very possible he would have spoke out against some of the attrocities the US commited.

Yeah, what he said. This is very well put, and I wish I had said it.

[Jmacq1]

It would be interesting to know Caps views on a lot of the less ethical things the US did during WW2.

That said, Cap had to pick his battles. Even if he knew about some of the things that were happening in the US, deciding to rise up against the US during a world war probably wouldn't have been terribly good an idea for anyone at the time.

I'll wager Cap woudln't have bothered fighting SHIELD had it been in the middle of the Kang Dynasty storyline for example. Things like world wars or intergalactic invasions probably take priority over taking stands against laws you don't believe it.

I've very possible he was more naive about US government during WW2. But it's also believable that he was a bit busy at the time... bigger more important battles needed to be fought. Had he been around at the end of the war, it's very possible he would have spoke out against some of the attrocities the US commited.

As I recall, Captain America has been portrayed as ashamed/regretful of things like Japanese Internment Camps and the like. He was also outraged when he found out that prior/unfinished versions of the Super-Soldier Serum were tested on Blacks, often with fatal consequences. Not to mention that rather recently there was a storyline that suggested that it was the -government- that froze Captain America (though that's fortunately been retconned) because they were afraid Captain America would speak out against/condemn the use of the atomic bomb against Japan.

In a nutshell, Steve wasn't proud or necessarily supportive of the "darker" aspects of Wartime USA. But as others have noted, he had other battles to fight at the time.

Oh, and one other note: Comparing the wartime draft of US soldiers to the SHRA is silly. Unless you can tell me who the US is currently at war with that they need to draft all these superheroes into service? Bear in mind the SHRA is -not- a "we'll call you up in case of emergency" bit. It's a "Your arse belongs to SHIELD" sort of thing.

[bulbasteve]

As I recall, Captain America has been portrayed as ashamed/regretful of things like Japanese Internment Camps and the like. He was also outraged when he found out that prior/unfinished versions of the Super-Soldier Serum were tested on Blacks, often with fatal consequences. Not to mention that rather recently there was a storyline that suggested that it was the -government- that froze Captain America (though that's fortunately been retconned) because they were afraid Captain America would speak out against/condemn the use of the atomic bomb against Japan.

In a nutshell, Steve wasn't proud or necessarily supportive of the "darker" aspects of Wartime USA. But as others have noted, he had other battles to fight at the time.

Oh, and one other note: Comparing the wartime draft of US soldiers to the SHRA is silly. Unless you can tell me who the US is currently at war with that they need to draft all these superheroes into service? Bear in mind the SHRA is -not- a "we'll call you up in case of emergency" bit. It's a "Your arse belongs to SHIELD" sort of thing.

If Magneto herding people into crematoriums in NYC wasn't an act of war, I don't know what is.

Also you really can't say what the SHRA is or isn't. I haven't seen the Great Lakes (insert name here) fighting Cap, She-Hulk is still a lawyer, Two-Gun kid is a NYS Bounty Hunter. Certainly more cases of people going about their normal lives than the one isolated case of getting some dirt on wonderman and using it against him.

[Jmacq1]

If Magneto herding people into crematoriums in NYC wasn't an act of war, I don't know what is.

Also you really can't say what the SHRA is or isn't. I haven't seen the Great Lakes (insert name here) fighting Cap, She-Hulk is still a lawyer, Two-Gun kid is a NYS Bounty Hunter. Certainly more cases of people going about their normal lives than the one isolated case of getting some dirt on wonderman and using it against him.

Or beating on Luke Cage's door with a SHIELD Cape-Killer squad five minutes after the act went into effect? Despite the fact that he had not engaged in any "super-hero" activity and at that moment showed no signs of doing so? That's a perfect example of what "peaceful protest" gets you with the SHRA. Clearly "retirement" is not an option, as some people claim. Given that the issue in question was written my Marvel's current "poster boy" and was a clear tie-in to the crossover. I can quite confidently state that:

The SHRA makes the heroes completely answerable to SHIELD. They can make you do whatever they want, whenever they want, and if you disagree, they'll arrest you and/or send you to the Negative Zone. The only reason this hasn't happened to some others is because SHIELD hasn't tapped them yet. Not that they need to in most cases: She-Hulk has clearly been shown among Iron Man's "active" forces. The heroes getting "pushed" are more often those that may have registered but (at least at first) weren't actively taking part in hunting down Anti-Reg heroes or otherwise proactively spreading the party line.

And funny, I don't recall Magneto representing every superhuman on Earth, or even in the United States (last time I checked, the X-Men -did- live in the United States). Or even supervillains in general. Nevermind that it wasn't really Magneto anyway. Maybe the U.S. could have declared war on the remnants of Genosha, but instead you apparently feel it's more correct to condemn an entire group of people for the actions of one with a history of violence and terrorist acts? You're saying that every superhuman on Earth is no better than an insane faux-Magneto? I just want to be clear, because that's -really- what it sounds like you're trying to say. "Magneto attacked! KILL OR ENSLAVE ALL THE SUPERHUMANS!"

[Xanrn]

Yes I am confused about the retirement.

Firestar seemed to think she could quit and not have to register.

While Jessica Jones who has retired gets told she will have to sign

Firestar is probably mistaken but it hasn't been addressed yet.

[bulbasteve]

Or beating on Luke Cage's door with a SHIELD Cape-Killer squad five minutes after the act went into effect? Despite the fact that he had not engaged in any "super-hero" activity and at that moment showed no signs of doing so? That's a perfect example of what "peaceful protest" gets you with the SHRA. Clearly "retirement" is not an option, as some people claim. Given that the issue in question was written my Marvel's current "poster boy" and was a clear tie-in to the crossover. I can quite confidently state that:

It's a superhuman registration act. He didn't register, and is a known associate of Cap, what did you want them to wait until he was beating on Iron Man to arrest him? He broke the law, they had every right to take him in.

Anyway, umm like pretty much all peaceful protest gets you arrested. That's sorta the point of it, that you get the publicity and work through the legal system. If Rosa Parks went and beat up 30 Police Officers I think race relations may have taken quite the dip :p

The SHRA makes the heroes completely answerable to SHIELD. They can make you do whatever they want, whenever they want, and if you disagree, they'll arrest you and/or send you to the Negative Zone. The only reason this hasn't happened to some others is because SHIELD hasn't tapped them yet. Not that they need to in most cases: She-Hulk has clearly been shown among Iron Man's "active" forces. The heroes getting "pushed" are more often those that may have registered but (at least at first) weren't actively taking part in hunting down Anti-Reg heroes or otherwise proactively spreading the party line.

Wow you got all that from an issue which didn't even talk about it!? Please show me an issue where it states that SHIELD has the right to arrest you for disagreeing. Only example we had was that they would bring Wonder Man on his embezzling charges, not try him for insubordination.

And funny, I don't recall Magneto representing every superhuman on Earth, or even in the United States (last time I checked, the X-Men -did- live in the United States). Or even supervillains in general. Nevermind that it wasn't really Magneto anyway. Maybe the U.S. could have declared war on the remnants of Genosha, but instead you apparently feel it's more correct to condemn an entire group of people for the actions of one with a history of violence and terrorist acts? You're saying that every superhuman on Earth is no better than an insane faux-Magneto? I just want to be clear, because that's -really- what it sounds like you're trying to say. "Magneto attacked! KILL OR ENSLAVE ALL THE SUPERHUMANS!"

He didn't just attack, he put people systamtically to death. That is war crimes right there. Every super person he ever even talked to should have put in trial for aiding and abetting.

So we have the hypocritical mutants who complain the government is going to put them into camps and kill them and then do it themselves. Hey what about Wanda? The government is always villified for trying to put out mutant cures, but when Wanda forces 90% of the mutant population to lose their powers they just keep it all a secret and let her go into hiding.

But it isn't just that there are known terrorists (who have probably done more harm than than human ones in the MU), but the fact is that theirs is a potential for that kind of harm. It is just naive to trust that superpeople will always do the right thing, there NEEDS to be regulation of them, they really are walking weapons of mass destruction. Just because Xavier doesn't mind control the President doesn't mean he can't and even more importantly doesn't mean that people in the MU fear he could or is already doing it.

They do live in a world without the beneift of 1st person perspective of the heroes like we have, they have the Bugle and what they see with their own eyes to tell them what superheroes are like. Now if they are keeping villain activity a secret, why woudln't any rational person in the MU think they are not keeping their own illegal activities a secret as well? Cause it already stretches enough imagination from us readers that so many superpeople seem to be walking saints, imagine the what they think when they are actually living in that world.