Who thinks Cap deserved to get knocked around by IM? [Archive]

Disc13

08-30-2006, 02:43 AM

There's a lot of bashing of Iron Man over this whole forum, and about how everything he is doing is wrong. However, one thing that I'm reading and shaking my head at is, "IM shouldn't have beaten Cap around like that"; of course refering to the latest Civil War issue. What?

All Stark wanted to do was to talk to Cap, and after Cap agrees and everything seems smooth, Cap "sucker punches" Stark using the neural inhibitor (or whatever it was, too lazy to dig out the comic) and then physically sucker punches him in the face... with his shield. Granted I'm sure no damage was done because of Stark's extremis enhancements, but I don't see how you can argue that Cap did nothing to deserve a beating.

Heck, the anti-regs were lucky that Stark fabricated this meeting to explain to Cap and friends what the Registration act was trying to do. He could have just ordered Shield agents to have started firing the second the anti-regs teleported in. But Captain America had to be stubborn and instead of listening, decides to immediately resort to violence.

Captain America sneakily attacked first against a more powerful opponent, initiating the fight, and deserved to have his ass kicked. I don't see any reason that would falsify this claim, but please, prove me wrong if you can.

EDIT: I'm not asking whether Cap deserved to have his ass kicked for his role in the CW, but rather whether he should of had his ass kicked for what he did in that single issue alone.

misterorange

08-30-2006, 02:52 AM

Disc13

08-30-2006, 03:01 AM

I think this has been touched on awhile ago, but i could be wrong. Another thing to think of is Iron Man could have tried to talk to Cap about this whole in private but didnt seem like he ever made the attempt. He could have showed up at the Shop on fire alone and try to talk to him, but he was there in full force and already took out two of Caps men so i think that pissed him off greatly.

On the other hand, it's not as if Cap tried to talk to Iron Man about it either. In fact, is there any panel where Cap tries to question someone in the know about the details of the Registration Act? And why would Iron Man show up alone? He's a smart man, he must realize that there is a great chance that there will be a rumble. Why not have backup? You're right though, Cap was probably pissed that his escape methods were gone. However, I don't think any of this suggests that Cap shoudn't of had his ass kicked.

misterorange

08-30-2006, 03:13 AM

On the other hand, it's not as if Cap tried to talk to Iron Man about it either. In fact, is there any panel where Cap tries to question someone in the know about the details of the Registration Act? And why would Iron Man show up alone? He's a smart man, he must realize that there is a great chance that there will be a rumble. Why not have backup? You're right though, Cap was probably pissed that his escape methods were gone. However, I don't think any of this suggests that Cap shoudn't of had his ass kicked. If your the man and think what you are doing is right then Iron Man should have made these steps to talk to Cap. He assumed Cap would be on his side and he kinda overestimated that. Iron Man should have showed up alone to show that he really meant what he meant.

Nomad

08-30-2006, 03:21 AM

Iron Man made his point by declaring martial law. It was overkill

Kyle_Ion

08-30-2006, 03:56 AM

There's a lot of bashing of Iron Man over this whole forum, and about how everything he is doing is wrong. However, one thing that I'm reading and shaking my head at is, "IM shouldn't have beaten Cap around like that"; of course refering to the latest Civil War issue. What?

All Stark wanted to do was to talk to Cap, and after Cap agrees and everything seems smooth, Cap "sucker punches" Stark using the neural inhibitor (or whatever it was, too lazy to dig out the comic) and then physically sucker punches him in the face... with his shield. Granted I'm sure no damage was done because of Stark's extremis enhancements, but I don't see how you can argue that Cap did nothing to deserve a beating.

Heck, the anti-regs were lucky that Stark fabricated this meeting to explain to Cap and friends what the Registration act was trying to do. He could have just ordered Shield agents to have started firing the second the anti-regs teleported in. But Captain America had to be stubborn and instead of listening, decides to immediately resort to violence.

Captain America sneakily attacked first against a more powerful opponent, initiating the fight, and deserved to have his ass kicked. I don't see any reason that would falsify this claim, but please, prove me wrong if you can.

I voted no

If Iron Man was really serious in actually talking to Cap he would have come alone and asked Cap to come alone, but no of course not. Another thing I think it is completely wrong that Iron Man and Cap Study and Record everyones moves. So I blame everything on Iron Man

Jeff-E

08-30-2006, 04:42 AM

I voted yes, now I love the character of Captain America, but it's time someone reminded him that he's not a god. He can't just do whatever he wants to do, now I know the fight was not punishment, but they have shown time and time again that if you try to talk to Cap he flips out a attacks. I just felt it was time he got knocked down a bit and this time it wasn't some S.H.I.E.L.D. prison guard or a scientist that he could just slap around. It was Ironman and he bit off more than he could chew

Effect

08-30-2006, 04:54 AM

scottv

08-30-2006, 05:07 AM

Cap is only standing up for what he believes in.

Jeff-E

08-30-2006, 05:07 AM

Markavian

08-30-2006, 05:27 AM

Iron Man made his point by declaring martial law. It was overkill
Iron Man Decared Martial law? He did NOT nor does he have the Authority to do so sheesh:mad: :rolleyes: :eek:

Markavian

08-30-2006, 05:29 AM

Cap is only standing up for what he believes in.
::coughs coughs:: Double Standard much?:rolleyes:

Nomad

08-30-2006, 05:29 AM

Iron Man Decared Martial law? He did NOT nor does he have the Authority to do so sheesh:mad: :rolleyes: :eek:

Ok, you're right. We'll wait for Baron Zemo on that one

Markavian

08-30-2006, 05:50 AM

Most certainly no. See there is a difference to the type of damage that both Captain America and Iron Man can do. What Captain America did to Iron Man during that issue pales in comparison to what Iron Man did I think. The level of damge output is different different and that should be clear. What happen here was like IM slapping a friend of Caps only receiving punch to face from Cap to IM only for IM to turn around to try and hit Cap with his truck in return and then attempt to run over his body after he was hit. That is what I saw here.

If IM was serious about talking to Captain America there is nothing stopping him attempting to find Captain America alone and talk to him. Or him showing up without the suit even if he had his forces in hiding in case something happen. Tony's a control freak and it's that nature of his that caused the whole situation to go from bad to worse. Him having two of Caps guys taken out before even bringing up the subject of talking right there sours the entire situation and just serves to piss off Cap.

Tony's problem in all this I think is that he's underestimating a lot of people and it's going to come back and bite him in the ass. Captain America, Spider-man, Luke Cage, etc. It's as if he figured they'd all see his point of view and not go against him for some reason. Especiallly Peter where he seems to be taking a lot of liberities and pretty much threatened him unless he fell in line I feel at the very beginning of this. The ONLY way to get Cap to come out in the Open was to send out the Fake Emergancy.And Yes Iron Man showed up with back up after Cap almost killed SHEILD and NYPD personel in CW 2 So would I. Sure Iron Man used NON LETHAL Tranq Darts to ensure Cap didnt just Pop away from the scene but again I would have done that or maybe set up some sort of Jammers in the perimeter and activated them once Cap and his Cult Followers were there.But either way was fine as they didnt involve Lethal Force.Iron Man is now a Duly Certified Enforcer of the Law now he can do such things Legally and he should. He Exposed his face leaving Himself open trying to show his non violent intentions and Good faith. He just wanted 5 freaking Minutes..You would think after all they went through over the years Since Tony was one of the 4 who found him frozen in the North Atlantic that Cap could have spared the man 5 lousy minutes then say yes or no...But Cap has gone radical and abandoned the principles that were once so near and dear to his heart :Reason Compassion Willing to Listen to the Other side Respect for those who do the hard day to day work of Law and Order in America and Most of All his Respect for the Opinions for the Will and Opinion of the Average American.Its all right for Cap to pound Iron Mans Exposed Face with an Adamantium and Vibranium indestructible sheild but wrong for Iron Man to strike back with a mere fraction of his Force. This is the Same Argument Made to condem Israel for Pounding Hezbollah for Killing 8 Soldiers and kidnapping 2 ."The Counter Attack Wasnt "proportionate! " Sheesh!! You hit Someone you better make it take them out !! Otherwise you better be ready to take whast they will dish out in retaliation. Cap WANTS War.No Two ways About it. Look at his actions last few years.. He Thinks he is above the law and the Political System and the will of the American People He is 100% Wrong and Deserved Everything Iron Man Dished out and then some!!:mad: :p :cool:

Mr.Musgrave

08-30-2006, 07:32 AM

The ONLY way to get Cap to come out in the Open was to send out the Fake Emergancy.

That's called "entrapment" and it's illegal just like the profiling I mentioned in the other thread. Why is it that you call "double-standard" on Cap but not on Iron Man? But hey, it's not like the bill of rights is important or anything.

Markavian

08-30-2006, 07:57 AM

That's called "entrapment" and it's illegal just like the profiling I mentioned in the other thread. Why is it that you call "double-standard" on Cap but not on Iron Man? But hey, it's not like the bill of rights is important or anything.
Entrapment is FRAMING Someone for a Crime. Luring People out is a Standard Police proceedure used quite often . Recently police told 400 people with outstanding Warrents they won a 72 inch Plasma TV . They showed up at a Warehouse only to be arrested. Iron Man Wasnt charging Cap with anything just wanted to get him in the open to talk if possible, All quite legal and Moral if it is to end Strife and lawbreaking.:cool:

Mr.Musgrave

08-30-2006, 08:00 AM

Entrapment is FRAMING Someone for a Crime. Luring People out is a Standard Police proceedure used quite often . Recently police told 400 people with outstanding Warrents they won a 72 inch Plasma TV . They showed up at a Warehouse only to be arrested. Iron Man Wasnt charging Cap with anything just wanted to get him in the open to talk if possible, All quite legal and Moral if it is to end Strife and lawbreaking.:cool:

Entrapment is NOT framing someone for a crime. I don't even know how you came to that conclusion. I don't know where you get your information but it is wrong.

XPac

08-30-2006, 08:05 AM

::coughs coughs:: Double Standard much?:rolleyes:

Well, that's the thing... it was established prior to Civil War that he doesn't actually believe in registration.

Actually believing in something, and just going along with it because you think it's inevitable are 2 different things.

Red Lotus

08-30-2006, 09:06 AM

That's called "entrapment" and it's illegal just like the profiling I mentioned in the other thread. Why is it that you call "double-standard" on Cap but not on Iron Man? But hey, it's not like the bill of rights is important or anything.

Entrapment is the act of tricking somebody into committing a crime in order to obtain a prosecution.

This was not entrapment. By not being register the anti side is breaking the law. This was more like a Anti Sting.

Gregg Helmberger

08-30-2006, 09:09 AM

I voted no. The entire thing was wet up as an ambush where they used the anti-regs heroism against them in a most cowardly way, and the way the pro-regs made themselves known was by taking down two of Cap's men. This wasn't exactly a friendly chat.

And this nonsense I keep hearing about "Tony only wanted to talk" is a complete canard. Tony wasn't offering a little staff meeting with Starbucks and donuts where people air their differences, maybe reach an agreement or maybe not and then everyone walks away. No, Tony was offering to discuss surrender terms whereby Captain America and his entire force would sign onto the monstrous Registration Act or else voluntarily go into exile in the freakin' Negative Zone. It's not like Tony would have let Cap just walk away, for God's sake. Tony came to that phony fire with every intention of ending the anti-reg side permanently, by their wholesale and unmitaged surrender if possible and by inflicting whatever harm on them he deemed necessary if not. So this whole thing about Tony seeking peace is a bunch of...stuff, is what it is.

** Edited for spelling

Markavian

08-30-2006, 09:19 AM

Entrapment is NOT framing someone for a crime. I don't even know how you came to that conclusion. I don't know where you get your information but it is wrong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entrapment

Gregg Helmberger

08-30-2006, 09:26 AM

Markavian, I think you're misunderstanding. Entrapment is the authorities providing inducement for a person to commit a crime the person would not otherwise have committed. Framing is deliberately making it appear that an innocent person has committed a crime that was, in fact, committed by someone else. They're completely unrelated.

**Edited because for some reason I can't freakin' spell today.

Erazmus

08-30-2006, 09:40 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entrapment

I fail to see anywhere in that article that mentions framing at all, or even hints at it? In the side bar, it has a link to Frameup (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frameup). Frameup and Entrapment are two completely different things. They are not mutually exclusive. Since you're very keen on links, here's a couple for you that are succinct.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=frameup

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=entrapment

Markavian

08-30-2006, 09:59 AM

I fail to see anywhere in that article that mentions framing at all, or even hints at it? In the side bar, it has a link to Frameup (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frameup). Frameup and Entrapment are two completely different things. They are not mutually exclusive. Since you're very keen on links, here's a couple for you that are succinct.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=frameup

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=entrapment
And it was Mr Musgrave who brought up the entrapment issue incorrectly I was just pointing out he was mistaken. To compare the SHRA with the Actions of the Nazis is way over the top.And Entrapment is in effect a Legal Frameup by enticing Someone to commit a crime.

Kefky

08-30-2006, 10:13 AM

XPac

08-30-2006, 10:18 AM

I voted yes. I don't care if IM was out of line setting up a trap and knocking out Wiccan and Cloak, the fact is that this may have been the last chance for both sides to solve this without starting a war, and Cap blew it out of stuborness and biterness.

I don't think Tony's in the right either, but I think the purpose of the scene was to show that both men are starting to screw up by now.

There's always Black Panther's wedding (did that come out already?). If Tony truelly is interesting in talking and not setting a trap for Cap, he can try talking there. If he's not interested in talking there, in the most neutral ground you can possible have, then he's not really interested in talking at all.

Jmacq1

08-30-2006, 10:23 AM

And it was Mr Musgrave who brought up the entrapment issue incorrectly I was just pointing out he was mistaken. To compare the SHRA with the Actions of the Nazis is way over the top.And Entrapment is in effect a Legal Frameup by enticing Someone to commit a crime.

No, Entrapment is -not- "legal". It gets people out of jail free if it's proven. And in this case, it's a tough call as to whether it'd be entrapment or a "sting". Either way, Cap didn't really deserve what he got. Mark Millar might deserve it for turning 616 Cap into Ultimate Cap, but given that I don't agree with the SHRA as its' currently written anyway, I think Cap's more "right" than Tony is at this point. (Though Tony has some good ideas and valid points when he's -not- rolling tobacco into strips of the original Constitution and smoking it).

Bottom line: Tony in -no- way gave -any- indication that he really wanted a peaceful conversation. He lured them under false pretenses, showed up with overwhelming force, and fired the first shots (non-lethal or otherwise). As stated above, he wanted to dictate surrender terms. No more, no less. I'm sure in his heart he wishes Steve would just suddenly accept that Tony is infallible and that what he's doing is the "right" thing, but if he -really- wanted to talk and he's -really- so smart....I'm -damn- certain that he and Steve have -some- kind of covert means of communication already established. I mean for crying out loud, Steve had override access codes to Tony's armor just a few issues ago! That indicates an -extreme- level of trust on Tony's part.

Of course, if they'd acted like the old friends they should be as opposed to the one-dimensional stereotypes they've been reduced to for this crossover, we wouldn't have the whiz-bang superhero-vs-superhero action. It annoys me that what should be one of the most effective friendships/partnerships in the Marvel Universe is getting busted up (again) over this mess. And -both- characters are losing fans on the opposite sides. There are enough personality and plot holes in this crossover to drive Galactus' worldship through.

Oh, and by the way: Look up the meaning of the world "Cult". Since it really doesn't apply to Captain America's insurgency in any way. They're all Anti-Registration for their own reasons, not because they "worship" any particular idea or person (especially Cap).

Kefky

08-30-2006, 10:28 AM

There's always Black Panther's wedding (did that come out already?). If Tony truelly is interesting in talking and not setting a trap for Cap, he can try talking there. If he's not interested in talking there, in the most neutral ground you can possible have, then he's not really interested in talking at all.

I don't see any way the wedding could have happened before civil war 03.

And either way, I'm interpreting the scene in the book as it played out. Iron-man tried to talk, Cap refused because he was more interested in getting even. The end.

misterorange

08-30-2006, 10:50 AM

The ONLY way to get Cap to come out in the Open was to send out the Fake Emergancy.And Yes Iron Man showed up with back up after Cap almost killed SHEILD and NYPD personel in CW 2 So would I. Sure Iron Man used NON LETHAL Tranq Darts to ensure Cap didnt just Pop away from the scene but again I would have done that or maybe set up some sort of Jammers in the perimeter and activated them once Cap and his Cult Followers were there.But either way was fine as they didnt involve Lethal Force.Iron Man is now a Duly Certified Enforcer of the Law now he can do such things Legally and he should. He Exposed his face leaving Himself open trying to show his non violent intentions and Good faith. He just wanted 5 freaking Minutes..You would think after all they went through over the years Since Tony was one of the 4 who found him frozen in the North Atlantic that Cap could have spared the man 5 lousy minutes then say yes or no...But Cap has gone radical and abandoned the principles that were once so near and dear to his heart :Reason Compassion Willing to Listen to the Other side Respect for those who do the hard day to day work of Law and Order in America and Most of All his Respect for the Opinions for the Will and Opinion of the Average American.Its all right for Cap to pound Iron Mans Exposed Face with an Adamantium and Vibranium indestructible sheild but wrong for Iron Man to strike back with a mere fraction of his Force. This is the Same Argument Made to condem Israel for Pounding Hezbollah for Killing 8 Soldiers and kidnapping 2 ."The Counter Attack Wasnt "proportionate! " Sheesh!! You hit Someone you better make it take them out !! Otherwise you better be ready to take whast they will dish out in retaliation. Cap WANTS War.No Two ways About it. Look at his actions last few years.. He Thinks he is above the law and the Political System and the will of the American People He is 100% Wrong and Deserved Everything Iron Man Dished out and then some!!:mad: :p :cool:
LoL that is the best part of the whole thing. You honestly believe Cap wants war? If he wanted this he would be a lot more extreme than what he is and wouldn't give to sh*ts about the american people. Hell didnt him and his band of outlaws stop the Sinister Six in one of the books (well mentioned). What about Iron Man? He is willing to capture other people and send them right to this prison even before a trial...that is wrong beyond anything.

XPac

08-30-2006, 10:51 AM

I don't see any way the wedding could have happened before civil war 03.

And either way, I'm interpreting the scene in the book as it played out. Iron-man tried to talk, Cap refused because he was more interested in getting even. The end.

I'm guessing the Wedding took place after CW3 too. That said, if Tony wants to try and talk he can there. If he was genuinely there to talk and not to just trap them, he's got his chance to prove it.

As for the version of events you described... its missing a few parts. It's more like this... Iron Man lied to Cap, Iron Man fired on Caps allies, then Iron Man tried to talk. Look at the whole picture rather than just fragments, and it starts making a little more sense.

Kefky

08-30-2006, 10:58 AM

As for the version of events you described... its missing a few parts. It's more like this... Iron Man lied to Cap, Iron Man fired on Caps allies, then Iron Man tried to talk. Look at the whole picture rather than just fragments, and it starts making a little more sense.

I wasn't skipping it, just focusing on Cap's reaction to all of that. That's why I said IM was wrong too.

Erazmus

08-30-2006, 10:58 AM

What about Iron Man? He is willing to capture other people and send them right to this prison even before a trial...that is wrong beyond anything.

I agree with what you are saying. But one could argue that since the SHRA is law, anyone breaking the law goes to jail. The law, to me, is unjust and wrong. Hence, my signature, just because something is law, doesn't make it right or good. Cap also thinks the law is wrong. You'd think the government would've approached the super human community to come to a consensus. Instead they unilaterally came to a decision and forced it upon everyone without a vote or feedback. It became a knee-jerk, accept it or go to jail. I don’t think cap wanted war either, I would imagine he wanted to sit down with the law makers and come to an understanding. Instead, Shield said, if you’re not with us, you’re a criminal. Then they attacked. Kind of hard for him to trust anyone on the side of the SHRA at this point.

Morw

08-30-2006, 11:36 AM

I vote yes. Cap needed the beating simply for killing a SHIELD officer who just did his job by throwing him out of a moving truck, and endagering normal police officers just doing their duty to escort a prisoner transport.

As for the nagging about the pro side act like Nazi. Please stopp, You do not know what your talking about, you have no idea what the nazi did or how they act. To you its just a word, its not. and SHIELD are boyscouts with shiny glorie compeared to the nazi. So just stopp it.

As for what IM did to lure out cap. it was legal, it might be a trap but thats also legal when trying tocapture a known crimminal. Law enfrocment agency's all over the world use bait to get crimminals. T bring in entrapment and try to make it look bad makes me wonder if you guys rob old people in your spare time and just dont like it when the police is doing their job.

Gregg Helmberger

08-30-2006, 11:43 AM

I vote yes. Cap needed the beating simply for killing a SHIELD officer who just did his job by throwing him out of a moving truck, and endagering normal police officers just doing their duty to escort a prisoner transport.

What? Cap didn't kill the guy. Show me where it says that he did.

As for what IM did to lure out cap. it was legal, it might be a trap but thats also legal when trying tocapture a known crimminal. Law enfrocment agency's all over the world use bait to get crimminals. T bring in entrapment and try to make it look bad makes me wonder if you guys rob old people in your spare time and just dont like it when the police is doing their job.

The point, of course, is that it's fatuous to set a trap, lure someone in, attack them and then get irritated when they won't talk to you. You've already settled the course on violence, so when the other guy reciprocates, you can't then whine about, "I only wanted to taaaaaaaaaaaaalk." THAT'S the point. That's why I don't have a beef with Tony laying the trap -- it's war, as we keep being told, and all's fair etc. etc. What I am baffled and amused by is the pro-reg side of the debate saying, "Tony just wanted to talk and Cap unreasonably attacked him!" which is malarky of the first water.

XPac

08-30-2006, 11:45 AM

I vote yes. Cap needed the beating simply for killing a SHIELD officer who just did his job by throwing him out of a moving truck, and endagering normal police officers just doing their duty to escort a prisoner transport.

I'm assuming if Cap had killed the SHIELD soldiers it would have been mentioned (unless it was mentioned and I missed it somewhere).

Jmacq1

08-30-2006, 11:49 AM

I vote yes. Cap needed the beating simply for killing a SHIELD officer who just did his job by throwing him out of a moving truck, and endagering normal police officers just doing their duty to escort a prisoner transport.

Which SHIELD agent did Cap kill again? Did we see a body? Did SHIELD trumpet it all over the In-Universe news that Cap was killing SHIELD agents like they would instantly do if such were the case?

Oh right...they didn't. Because that SHIELD agent didn't die, and neither did anyone else in that breakout. Injured? I'm sure they probably were. But if they were dead, it would be a MAJOR PLOT POINT. One which has not materialized, and thus is proven false.

As for what IM did to lure out cap. it was legal, it might be a trap but thats also legal when trying tocapture a known crimminal. Law enfrocment agency's all over the world use bait to get crimminals. T bring in entrapment and try to make it look bad makes me wonder if you guys rob old people in your spare time and just dont like it when the police is doing their job.

And all this blind obedience to law and government makes me wonder if certain people would even realize if they -were- in a despotic regime.

Blind obedience and "following the crowd" is never a good thing. It's precisely the kind of thing that allows regimes like the Nazis to come to power.

The Law is not always right, fair, or just.

The Government is not infallible. In fact it's more fallible than most.

Just because you live in a "democracy" doesn't mean the government is always right, -or- necessarily always really looking out for the people they govern.

Now in the real world yes, there are legal means to try to challenge the laws and work within the system to get them changed. Though it usually takes years/decades and even then doesn't always solve the problems at hand.

In the comic-book world, using such avenues would be boring and make for one of the most unexciting comic-books to ever be written. Any talk of Captain America "working the system" in that regard is pretty silly, given that if he -had- and if it had worked, there WOULDN'T BE ANY STORY. Steve and Tony are being forced by the writers to play their roles to sell more funnybooks. No more, no less. To apply real-world common sense to the Marvel Universe and much less to expect its' characters to always implement it is to undermine the very foundation of the comics themselves: Action-fantasy.

Gregg Helmberger

08-30-2006, 11:50 AM

Now in the real world yes, there are legal means to try to challenge the laws and work within the system to get them changed. Though it usually takes years/decades and even then doesn't always solve the problems at hand.

In the comic-book world, using such avenues would be boring and make for one of the most unexciting comic-books to ever be written. Any talk of Captain America "working the system" in that regard is pretty silly, given that if he -had- and if it had worked, there WOULDN'T BE ANY STORY. Steve and Tony are being forced by the writers to play their roles to sell more funnybooks. No more, no less. To apply real-world common sense to the Marvel Universe and much less to expect its' characters to always implement it is to undermine the very foundation of the comics themselves: Action-fantasy.

Very well said.

Exo

08-30-2006, 11:52 AM

No, I don't think Cap's worthy of a beating. Likewise, I don't believe Ironman deserves one either.

Capt Hunter

08-30-2006, 11:58 AM

The name and title of Captain America does not belong to the United States government anymore. Steve Rogers was given full rights after Waid/Gurney's second Cap Arc... Yah for President Clinton.....

I don't think he's gonna give up without a fight.....

Erazmus

08-30-2006, 12:02 PM

As for the nagging about the pro side act like Nazi. Please stopp, You do not know what your talking about, you have no idea what the nazi did or how they act. To you its just a word, its not. and SHIELD are boyscouts with shiny glorie compeared to the nazi. So just stopp it.

I love it when people turn a blind eye to an analogy just because they don't like the analogy, regardless of its legitimacy. No one is saying Shield = Nazis. Never have I seen the word "equal" used. People really seem to have a tough time grasping equality versus comparison. We can say an apple is very like an orange in that they are both fruit and both are round (and many other things) but we are not saying one equals another. When you can come to that conclusion, maybe we will have more to discuss.

As for now, there are many things that Shield is doing that is very "Nazi-esque". I'm sorry if people can't grasp that. There are many analogies we could make, but that one seems to get people's attention.

Thirdly, don't assume what I do and do not know about history. Just because Shield isn't offing people in record numbers doesn't mean there aren't legitimate analogies to the ideologies or practices of the two organizations and the fact that both are corrupt.

If you don't wish to discuss the issue, then fine. I can respect that. But don't tell me not to discuss or acknowledge the likeness on various points between what Shield has done and is doing to what the Nazis did. Granted, the scale is different and the degree of evil is different. But to disavow any likeness because you don't "like" the analogy is short sided and petty.

I do appreciate your opinion, however.

Markavian

08-30-2006, 01:08 PM

Entrapment is the act of tricking somebody into committing a crime in order to obtain a prosecution.

This was not entrapment. By not being register the anti side is breaking the law. This was more like a Anti Sting.
You are correct on all counts.

The Shelf

08-30-2006, 02:28 PM

I love it when people turn a blind eye to an analogy just because they don't like the analogy, regardless of its legitimacy. No one is saying Shield = Nazis. Never have I seen the word "equal" used. People really seem to have a tough time grasping equality versus comparison. We can say an apple is very like an orange in that they are both fruit and both are round (and many other things) but we are not saying one equals another. When you can come to that conclusion, maybe we will have more to discuss.

As for now, there are many things that Shield is doing that is very "Nazi-esque". I'm sorry if people can't grasp that. There are many analogies we could make, but that one seems to get people's attention.

Thirdly, don't assume what I do and do not know about history. Just because Shield isn't offing people in record numbers doesn't mean there aren't legitimate analogies to the ideologies or practices of the two organizations and the fact that both are corrupt.

If you don't wish to discuss the issue, then fine. I can respect that. But don't tell me not to discuss or acknowledge the likeness on various points between what Shield has done and is doing to what the Nazis did. Granted, the scale is different and the degree of evil is different. But to disavow any likeness because you don't "like" the analogy is short sided and petty.

I do appreciate your opinion, however.

Okay, I'm new to this particular thread so I'm not bashing anyone or anything. You're right, no one is saying that Shield equals Nazis, but your analogy that Shield has some "Nazi-esque" features doesn't even hold. I'm not going to insult your intelligence either by telling you what the Nazi's did or did not do. We all know how terrible the Nazis were and what they stood for.

My argument is that Shield so far has a right to do everything they've done (at least from the stories I've read), and they are not demonstrating totalitarian behavior even remotely similar to that of the Nazis. All of my arguments come from what I've read in Civil War, Frontline, and the Spider-man tie-ins. If there are some exceptions to my arguments that do not occur in one of these books, you will have to forgive me because I do not collect any others.

First of all, in Civil War 1 Hill had every right to order Captain America to hunt down other supers. Captain America works for Shield so he must obey their orders.

Second, in Frontline 5 Shield had every right to weasel Wonder Man into doing what they wanted him to. He had committed a crime. He was going to go to jail for that crime. Shield was willing to let him go if he helped them. There is nothing wrong with that. It's called amnesty. The only thing questionable was when that one Shield agent mentioned something about a draft. This, in my opinion, was an exaggeration or a mistake. Nothing we have seen anywhere else indicates that the SHRA is a draft. The SHRA only says that supers must tell the government what their secret identity is. That's it. If they do that, they get the benefit of getting paid and having official sanction by the government to continue their line of work. If they don't do that, they're breaking the law anyway because it is illegal to have a false identity even in our own real life government.

Third, (and perhaps most important) Shield does not control supers. They are not controlling supers at all in Civil War so far. The only supers they are showing control over are the ones who have committed crimes (i.e. Wonder Man) or the ones who work for them (i.e. Captain America). Spider-man does not answer to Shield. Iron Man does not answer to Shield. Superheroes who have registered may refuse to work with Shield, but they may still fight crime so long as the government knows who they are. Aside from that, if the government evoked a draft then, yes, the superheroes would have to do everything the government told them, but so would you and I.

Now I'm not saying that Shield is not corrupted. Maybe they are, and maybe they aren't. All I'm saying is that Shield has not demonstrated any totalitarian or socialist behavior thus far in Civil War. That could always change, but so far we have no reason to believe that Shield is acting like a band of Nazis.

Again, if I'm missing something, keep in mind that I only collect Civil War, Frontline, and the Spider-man tie-ins. So if I missed an important exception to my argument please let me know.

EDIT: I just remembered that some are arguing that Shield is throwing people in super-jail without going through the due processes of law. The fact is, the due processes of law are used to determine whether or not someone is guilty of a crime. It's already obvious that the supers being caught are guilty of a crime because they are not registered and are keeping their identities a secret. Let's suppose that the government did put these supers in the courtroom. What would happen? The accusers (the government) would show that the super is not recorded in their "Supers who have registered" database, and the jury would judge them guilty as charged. So you can see that a trial is pointless and a waste of time. Try to think of it this way. Let's say that a police officer catches you driving without a license. You're guilty and they penalize you accordingly. That may not be enough to get you put in jail, but I'm sure disobeying the SHRA isn't either. My belief is that the reason supers are getting put in jail in Civil War is not because they were caught being unregistered, but because they fought back when they were caught. That is why supers are getting put in jail. The only thing questionable going on is the type of prison these supers are being placed in, but that had nothing to do with Shield. The prison was Tony's and Reed's idea, not Shield's. Then again, the prison might not be so questionable after all because the prisoners are not normal humans, they are supers. We have already seen that no normal prison can hold supers so maybe Tony's and Reed's prison is justified.

mattbib

08-30-2006, 02:34 PM

There's really two questions here.

1. 2. Is Cap wrong to oppose registration? Well, no, I don't think so personally. He's not morally wrong in any regard. In fact he's probably right.

2. Does Cap deserve to be punished for breaking the law and inciting others to do so? Yes. He's breaking the law, it's as simple as that.

Those are my opinions.

Disc13

08-30-2006, 03:10 PM

Hrm... lots of interesting arguments in here.

One thing that I see keeps getting popped up is: "Iron Man should have come alone and talked to Cap, or made some kind of attempt to talk to Cap alone." I think that that is incorrect. Cap is the one breaking the law, he should have sought out Tony to see if any arrangements could be made and to see the ramifications of the registration law. Even though what Tony did was a little tricky and violent to begin with, at least he did make an attempt to seek out Cap and discuss everything. Hell, it might have been better the way he did it because not only was Cap there, everyone on Caps side could have had a chance to listen to Stark's ideas, then decide for themselves.

A new law passes. Policemen don't need to go out to potential criminals (or actual criminals) and teach them about the new law. They just need to enforce the law when it gets broken. If people don't like that law, there are legal ways and channels to bring up the issues of why the law is wrong for the country. Cap by-stepped these legal channels. He was also offered a chance to have the law explained to him. He took neither, and immediately took action punching Iron Man in the face. Avengers #21, Cap asked Pym a question about the registration act that he said no one could answer. He had his chance to ask there at the fire- did he ask his question? Nope.

Also: "Cap is only fighting for what he believes in!"
Oh I see, and Iron Man is only fighting for the free cookies at the hero meetings? While Stark doesn't totally believe in the registration act, he believes that with him in relative charge of it that the superheroes in the U.S. can continue to operate with support from the people.

"Cap didn't deserve to be beat by a man in a suit of armor."
Uh... Captain America attacked Iron Man first. You want a man to attack a bear, and when the bear attacks back, it isn't fair? It's not as if Iron Man was going to kill Cap, he was going for a KO. Let's be reasonable- it takes a little more to KO a super soldier than a normal man. Why wouldn't it get bloody? Steve wanted a fist fight so that's what he got.

Morw

08-30-2006, 03:23 PM

we did no9t see all tyhe dead people that Hulk's rampaged killed in Vegas yet we know they are dead. We did not see all the dead in Stamford yet we know they are dead. So that kinda goes against the point that it has to be on panel to be a death. So to the point of it not mention, its not mention YET is the point. Heck the many deaths Hulk caused on his rampaged was almost always not mentioned untill they brought it up in Illuminatium.
secondly: I guss most here is familiar with the death of Gwen Stacy? well after it was pointed out that the webline would break her neck the changed it into actully beeing what would have happend, but she was dead befroe the drop. Now this indicate that normal physics apply to Normal humans in MU. Getting tossed out of a moving truck at full speed is most defently a good way to kill somebody. And if he didnt kill him then he could still be charged with attempting murder as it would be a freak of luck that he did not die. The physic tells us that he would be dead. Just as physics told us that one line at the foot would snapp Gwen's neck. Throwing a man so he lands on a highway right infront of speeding cars is also attemped murder. And I will end it with : the death is not mention YET! the series is not over.

The strange thing is that its not the people blindly following the goverment. Its the people asking the goverment to protect them from superhero's and supervillians going berserk. Its not despotic if te goverment actully listens to its people, that is called.. whats the word? oh yes democracy.

As for you saying there would not be any story? are you so sure? just becouse you dont see a story right now doesnt mean it would not be one. Beside real life is and has always been stranger then fiction. You could have a story about how the villians unite to fight the law becouse the law is actully going to make bigger problems for them. You could have it building up to one heck of a fight between villians and superheros. You could have made into a civil war between the superhero and SHIELD. There are many storyies you can make out of the concpet that could be just as good or even better without making into IM and Cap duking it out in a burning factory. It all comes down to the writter. So that argument doesnt hold water.

As for it beeing a bad law? No its not a bad law. But it might look like a bad law for those who are to set in the old ways.

In comic: It is a natural development of what has happend in MU andis actully a far better solution the other suggestion ( like banning superhero's).

story wise: You are going to get alot of new stories now, new uppertunites. Easier to get superheros into situations and even have them traveling around. Writter wise it opens alot more oppertunities.

The comment about the Nazi irc's me basicly becouse my family faced the nazi and suffered for it. And Im all for an compearson, but they need to be some sense to it. The SHIELD/nazi compearson is kinda like looking at a glass of water and say "my what a big ocean" and if you can compear SHIELD with nazi just becouse a few simularites then whats stopping you from going further. saying the normal lawenforcer are like the gestapo: "well they booth wear uniform and arrested people. " you see how silly that sounds? Thats how silly the SHIELD/nazi compearson is. Im annoyed about it becouse its not something thats only mention on this thread but it seems to be beeing put up and up again. Like somebody is spamming us with it.

And I think captain is moraly wrong to go against the law, but thats my opinion, and your entitled to your opinion. :)

Final word: can we try to keep the debat civil, it starts to get mighted heated discussion here. after all its just a comic book :)

streator

08-30-2006, 03:26 PM

iron-man was going to do more than just talk to cap and the anti-reg heroes.
it was pretty clear that all of them were going to be taken into s.h.i.e.l.d. custody.
stark even mentions wanting to get rid of them before he pushed the registration thing nationwide in the same issue as this confrontation.
so i voted no, cap did not deserve the beating in civil war 3.

MarcSpector13

08-30-2006, 03:28 PM

Mr.Musgrave

08-30-2006, 03:43 PM

You are correct on all counts.

No, he's not. By starting a fire and causing an emergency (something that's illegal on its own) Stark and his goose-steppers tricked Cap into committing a crime (since superheroics are now a crime.) Thus, it's entrapment and wouldn't hold up in court. Not that due process matters to the Nazi Stark.

Disc13

08-30-2006, 04:05 PM

Cap was there to help people who he thought were in trouble then put in a position where it was "join or Die" so you cant blame him for defending himself Plus they should havent attacked Wiccan and Cloak like that for god sakes, Billy was just a kid and hes beein taken down by a bunch of cape killers

I'm going to have to disagree here. It wasn't a "join us or die" ultimatum, it was a "join us or be arrested for breaking the law" ultimatum. People tend to forget, Captain America and his squad are breaking the law- no way around that.

Whether the law is just or not is something to be discussed in another topic.

As for attacking the teleporters, yeah, that is kinda sneaky, but think of it this way. If a group of criminals were robbing a bank, and the police knew their only avenue of escape was the get-away car sitting in front of the bank, wouldn't the police somehow disable this vehicle?

Disc13

08-30-2006, 04:09 PM

No, he's not. By starting a fire and causing an emergency (something that's illegal on its own) Stark and his goose-steppers tricked Cap into committing a crime (since superheroics are now a crime.) Thus, it's entrapment and wouldn't hold up in court. Not that due process matters to the Nazi Stark.

Technically I believe you are mistaken. It wasn't a real emergency per se, Cap's team reported it as an emergency. One could argue that Stark merely burned down/razed one of his own properties and Cap's team mistook the event as a chemical fire. I don't think it's illegal to destroy your own property.

And as for tricking Cap into commiting a crime, I think that crimes were already commited. It's not as if Cap was innocent of breaking the law before this event, he was already a wanted criminal that needed to be apprehended.

Markavian

08-30-2006, 04:25 PM

Okay, I'm new to this particular thread so I'm not bashing anyone or anything. You're right, no one is saying that Shield equals Nazis, but your analogy that Shield has some "Nazi-esque" features doesn't even hold. I'm not going to insult your intelligence either by telling you what the Nazi's did or did not do. We all know how terrible the Nazis were and what they stood for.

My argument is that Shield so far has a right to do everything they've done (at least from the stories I've read), and they are not demonstrating totalitarian behavior even remotely similar to that of the Nazis. All of my arguments come from what I've read in Civil War, Frontline, and the Spider-man tie-ins. If there are some exceptions to my arguments that do not occur in one of these books, you will have to forgive me because I do not collect any others.

First of all, in Civil War 1 Hill had every right to order Captain America to hunt down other supers. Captain America works for Shield so he must obey their orders.

Second, in Frontline 5 Shield had every right to weasel Wonder Man into doing what they wanted him to. He had committed a crime. He was going to go to jail for that crime. Shield was willing to let him go if he helped them. There is nothing wrong with that. It's called amnesty. The only thing questionable was when that one Shield agent mentioned something about a draft. This, in my opinion, was an exaggeration or a mistake. Nothing we have seen anywhere else indicates that the SHRA is a draft. The SHRA only says that supers must tell the government what their secret identity is. That's it. If they do that, they get the benefit of getting paid and having official sanction by the government to continue their line of work. If they don't do that, they're breaking the law anyway because it is illegal to have a false identity even in our own real life government.

Third, (and perhaps most important) Shield does not control supers. They are not controlling supers at all in Civil War so far. The only supers they are showing control over are the ones who have committed crimes (i.e. Wonder Man) or the ones who work for them (i.e. Captain America). Spider-man does not answer to Shield. Iron Man does not answer to Shield. Superheroes who have registered may refuse to work with Shield, but they may still fight crime so long as the government knows who they are. Aside from that, if the government evoked a draft then, yes, the superheroes would have to do everything the government told them, but so would you and I.

Now I'm not saying that Shield is not corrupted. Maybe they are, and maybe they aren't. All I'm saying is that Shield has not demonstrated any totalitarian or socialist behavior thus far in Civil War. That could always change, but so far we have no reason to believe that Shield is acting like a band of Nazis.

Again, if I'm missing something, keep in mind that I only collect Civil War, Frontline, and the Spider-man tie-ins. So if I missed an important exception to my argument please let me know.

EDIT: I just remembered that some are arguing that Shield is throwing people in super-jail without going through the due processes of law. The fact is, the due processes of law are used to determine whether or not someone is guilty of a crime. It's already obvious that the supers being caught are guilty of a crime because they are not registered and are keeping their identities a secret. Let's suppose that the government did put these supers in the courtroom. What would happen? The accusers (the government) would show that the super is not recorded in their "Supers who have registered" database, and the jury would judge them guilty as charged. So you can see that a trial is pointless and a waste of time. Try to think of it this way. Let's say that a police officer catches you driving without a license. You're guilty and they penalize you accordingly. That may not be enough to get you put in jail, but I'm sure disobeying the SHRA isn't either. My belief is that the reason supers are getting put in jail in Civil War is not because they were caught being unregistered, but because they fought back when they were caught. That is why supers are getting put in jail. The only thing questionable going on is the type of prison these supers are being placed in, but that had nothing to do with Shield. The prison was Tony's and Reed's idea, not Shield's. Then again, the prison might not be so questionable after all because the prisoners are not normal humans, they are supers. We have already seen that no normal prison can hold supers so maybe Tony's and Reed's prison is justified.
I am Pro all the way,But I wont lie I dont like where things have gone and if anyone has paid attention to Tonys thoughts he doesnt like it either . Now having said that The Anti Reg Heroes are breaking the Law. So far they have been lucky not to get hurt or killed or to have killed anyone .From what we have heard that will change in CW 4. I am most upset that the New Avengers were dragged into the War as Captain Americas Foot Soldiers.. Minors should never be dragged into Violence and NEVER EVER Encouraged to perform Violence.That is breaking one of Caps own personal laws.:( :

Markavian

08-30-2006, 04:31 PM

No, he's not. By starting a fire and causing an emergency (something that's illegal on its own) Stark and his goose-steppers tricked Cap into committing a crime (since superheroics are now a crime.) Thus, it's entrapment and wouldn't hold up in court. Not that due process matters to the Nazi Stark.
A Trap for Criminals . Remember Iron Man and the Registered Heroes and SHEILD are the Law. They are completly in their rights to Set up a scam to lure law breakers into the Open. Its Called a Sting.And I Know they wouldnt arrest or Charge Captain America for Showing up to fight a fake Fire but Rather his Attacking SHEILD Agents Kidnapping The New Avengers and such.

jester1436

08-30-2006, 05:04 PM

I am most upset that the New Avengers were dragged into the War as Captain Americas Foot Soldiers.. Minors should never be dragged into Violence and NEVER EVER Encouraged to perform Violence.That is breaking one of Caps own personal laws.:( :

Yes, it would have been so much better if SHIELD had hauled the Young Avengers off to the Negative Zone, because they obviously didn't want to register, considering they then couldn't be heroes at all after that. Captain America isn't forcing them to do ANYTHING, and they proved themselves as heroes in their book when the New Avengers were going to shut them down.

Should it be infered then, that there should be no Young Avengers team at all? And then by association, there should be no Runaways, no Arana, no Machine Teen, no New X-Men, or any other young generation super-hero?

You really have a very special twist on the characters in this story.

Markavian

08-30-2006, 05:08 PM

Yes, it would have been so much better if SHIELD had hauled the Young Avengers off to the Negative Zone, because they obviously didn't want to register, considering they then couldn't be heroes at all after that. Captain America isn't forcing them to do ANYTHING, and they proved themselves as heroes in their book when the New Avengers were going to shut them down.

Should it be infered then, that there should be no Young Avengers team at all? And then by association, there should be no Runaways, no Arana, no Machine Teen, no New X-Men, or any other young generation super-hero?

You really have a very special twist on the characters in this story.
They were Heading to 42 . I think as Minors they would have been handled differently ..Though I cant say for sure.

Jeff-E

08-30-2006, 05:22 PM

They were Heading to 42 . I think as Minors they would have been handled differently ..Though I cant say for sure.

Thats kind of a point of contention on the Young Avengers, with most unregistered combatants yes if they refused to register it's off to 42 with 'em. The Young Avengers (mind if I start using the abbreviation of YA? good) are a different ball of wax though. Saying that S.H.I.E.L.D. would have just shipped the YA off to 42 is purely assumption, it would be a more reasonable assumption to say that S.H.I.E.L.D. would have handled them differently since they are minors and almost every law has stipulations for minors. It would make more since for S.H.I.E.L.D. to uncover the ID's of the YA, notify their parents and have their parents register them. It is a pretty safe assumption that the parents would have to register them since minors can't do alot of things without parental concent. They wouldn't need to be made soldiers of S.H.I.E.L.D. so much as examples, then thrown back to their happy (or at this point unhappy) little lives where they would have to go back to school and do little kiddie things until they reached legal age. This seems more plausable to me than throwing children in to the Negative Zone, But people like demonizing the government so anywho, in the end they might have sat out the entire CW, but Cap ensured that they would be in the front of a violent battle, ironic since he was the one who refused to train them in battle techniques, and how to use their powers in the first place.

jester1436

08-30-2006, 05:47 PM

Thats kind of a point of contention on the Young Avengers, with most unregistered combatants yes if they refused to register it's off to 42 with 'em. The Young Avengers (mind if I start using the abbreviation of YA? good) are a different ball of wax though. Saying that S.H.I.E.L.D. would have just shipped the YA off to 42 is purely assumption, it would be a more reasonable assumption to say that S.H.I.E.L.D. would have handled them differently since they are minors and almost every law has stipulations for minors. It would make more since for S.H.I.E.L.D. to uncover the ID's of the YA, notify their parents and have their parents register them. It is a pretty safe assumption that the parents would have to register them since minors can't do alot of things without parental concent. They wouldn't need to be made soldiers of S.H.I.E.L.D. so much as examples, then thrown back to their happy (or at this point unhappy) little lives where they would have to go back to school and do little kiddie things until they reached legal age. This seems more plausable to me than throwing children in to the Negative Zone, But people like demonizing the government so anywho, in the end they might have sat out the entire CW, but Cap ensured that they would be in the front of a violent battle, ironic since he was the one who refused to train them in battle techniques, and how to use their powers in the first place.

Considering the histories of the various Young Avengers and the team as a whole, it would not be as simple as any of that. Being sent to the Negative Zone is just as likely as parental registration, which would simply raise more questions. What if a parent refuses to register their child? Are they then arrested? If so, what happens to the teen heroes? What about Hulkling who has no parents or parents who hate super-heroes? Would blackmail be used to control the kids? If the main target of the bill was for young heroes like the New Warriors and training them, then why would they be treated any differently? It doesn't make sense, especially if they're going to treat them like adults in the ways they're hunting them down.

The Young Avengers proved themselves, there's no irony to Cap providing them with a refuge when he - and all of the New Avengers - seemed to accept them at the end of the current run of Young Avengers.

Jeff-E

08-30-2006, 05:59 PM

Considering the histories of the various Young Avengers and the team as a whole, it would not be as simple as any of that. Being sent to the Negative Zone is just as likely as parental registration, which would simply raise more questions. What if a parent refuses to register their child? Are they then arrested? If so, what happens to the teen heroes? What about Hulkling who has no parents or parents who hate super-heroes? Would blackmail be used to control the kids? If the main target of the bill was for young heroes like the New Warriors and training them, then why would they be treated any differently? It doesn't make sense, especially if they're going to treat them like adults in the ways they're hunting them down.

The Young Avengers proved themselves, there's no irony to Cap providing them with a refuge when he - and all of the New Avengers - seemed to accept them at the end of the current run of Young Avengers.

I think you're missing my point, there is no reason to assume the YA would be shipped off to 42 because
A) I don't think Tony would allow it
2) Playing up peoples "evil white corporate devil incarnate" version of the government sending minors there makes no sense. It's a more powerfull message to make an example of the kids and force them to become legit. With the YA being kids they have two options make them maryters or bring them in and induct them. Which would you do from a strategic stand point? Plus you don't have the public backlash about inhumane treatment of children if you register them and send them on their way.
Q) If the government is as "by the book" as I think it is, there is most likely a minor stipulation in the SHRA, since like I said everyother law has a minor stipulation including such heinous acts as murder, and rape, why would the SHRA be the one exception.

AllisterH

08-30-2006, 06:05 PM

Actually, I'm kind of wondering...

How many of the Young Avenger parents actually know what they're doing and agree with it?

XPac

08-30-2006, 06:12 PM

IamtheRock3

08-30-2006, 06:28 PM

They were Heading to 42 . I think as Minors they would have been handled differently ..Though I cant say for sure.

The Fact you cant say For Sure
and the fact MOST of us cant say for sure

Shows the promblem with the registration. that stuff should be rather clear

IamtheRock3

08-30-2006, 06:33 PM

Jeff-E

08-30-2006, 06:42 PM

Tony Allow other to be tossed into a negative Zone. It a limit in what Tony NEEDS to allows. Sure Thunderbolts wasnt his idea either

Really didnt have seen Shield playing it by the book in these stories.

I apologize I'm not a hundred percent what you're getting at, however part of it I did catch, yes Tony allowed others to be tossed in to the Negative zone, however they were not minors. No matter how you cut it the YA are either more useful to a corrupt government roaming the streets, or wouldn't go there due to a strict by the book government seeing how they are kids.

IamtheRock3

08-30-2006, 06:53 PM

I apologize I'm not a hundred percent what you're getting at, however part of it I did catch, yes Tony allowed others to be tossed in to the Negative zone, however they were not minors. No matter how you cut it the YA are either more useful to a corrupt government roaming the streets, or wouldn't go there due to a strict by the book government seeing how they are kids.

What I am saying they dont NEED Tony Permission to tossed people in the negative Zone

Tony probally didnt agree to the thunderbolts thing

Also a lot of the stuff under the Radar

What If the Young guns simply refuse to help. A court case brings a lot of question about the registration. So far NONE of the Anti regs guys captures got court cases. It negative Zone

Not saying It a gurantee YG getting tossed there

But imagine they be slipped under the Radar for now

MOST of the goverment is not corrupt

But dont think they exactly GOING BY THE BOOK either
The book has been rewritten.

jester1436

08-30-2006, 09:37 PM

I think you're missing my point, there is no reason to assume the YA would be shipped off to 42 because
A) I don't think Tony would allow it
2) Playing up peoples "evil white corporate devil incarnate" version of the government sending minors there makes no sense. It's a more powerfull message to make an example of the kids and force them to become legit. With the YA being kids they have two options make them maryters or bring them in and induct them. Which would you do from a strategic stand point? Plus you don't have the public backlash about inhumane treatment of children if you register them and send them on their way.
Q) If the government is as "by the book" as I think it is, there is most likely a minor stipulation in the SHRA, since like I said everyother law has a minor stipulation including such heinous acts as murder, and rape, why would the SHRA be the one exception.

If SHIELD wanted the Young Avengers shipped off to 42, they'd be shipped off to 42. Iron Man may be out in the field as figurehead for registration, but he's only got freedom as far as he agrees with the way things go.

Again, how would they make them register? After the New Warriors disaster, I doubt the MU public would have positive feelings towards the Young Avengers either way. Being inhumane to minors with super-powers is not necessarily going to be viewed as being inhumane to minors, because they'd be viewed as a risk. Considering how both sides are behaving, the Young Avengers completely getting the shaft if taken into custody is more than likely. And again, who says their parents would agree to registration or would be able to. A few of these characters personal lives are up in ther air after their series, and if they're unwilling to register, what happens? What logically happens to Hulkling?

Major crimes have young people tried as adults all the time, and since the biggest crime in the Marvel U right now is unregistered super-heroics, they could very easily look the other way over their age.

Jeff-E

08-31-2006, 04:54 AM

If SHIELD wanted the Young Avengers shipped off to 42, they'd be shipped off to 42. Iron Man may be out in the field as figurehead for registration, but he's only got freedom as far as he agrees with the way things go.

Again, how would they make them register? After the New Warriors disaster, I doubt the MU public would have positive feelings towards the Young Avengers either way. Being inhumane to minors with super-powers is not necessarily going to be viewed as being inhumane to minors, because they'd be viewed as a risk. Considering how both sides are behaving, the Young Avengers completely getting the shaft if taken into custody is more than likely. And again, who says their parents would agree to registration or would be able to. A few of these characters personal lives are up in ther air after their series, and if they're unwilling to register, what happens? What logically happens to Hulkling?

Major crimes have young people tried as adults all the time, and since the biggest crime in the Marvel U right now is unregistered super-heroics, they could very easily look the other way over their age.

I guess it's another agree to disagree, because using everyone's "evil" government it makes more sense to use the YA and RunA's as examples, and if the government isn't corrupt it stands to reason they wouldn't ship 'em off to 42, or the negative zone or where ever. Kids do get tried as adults but the motion to try the child as an adult has to be submitted it's not automatically done. As far as public opinion goes you don't think someone wouldn't remind people that the YA's and RA's were kids, just like the kids who died in Stamford? No matter what there is always sympathy towards children, always, and in a hot button issue like the SHRA thats going to double the amount of sympathy towards the YA. Look at any child murder case where they are tried as an adult, there is always picketers outside the courthouse. The SHRA has people devided, you think suddenly the YA's are going to unite everyone to be for the SHRA?

Jmacq1

08-31-2006, 05:57 AM

I guess it's another agree to disagree, because using everyone's "evil" government it makes more sense to use the YA and RunA's as examples, and if the government isn't corrupt it stands to reason they wouldn't ship 'em off to 42, or the negative zone or where ever. Kids do get tried as adults but the motion to try the child as an adult has to be submitted it's not automatically done. As far as public opinion goes you don't think someone wouldn't remind people that the YA's and RA's were kids, just like the kids who died in Stamford? No matter what there is always sympathy towards children, always, and in a hot button issue like the SHRA thats going to double the amount of sympathy towards the YA. Look at any child murder case where they are tried as an adult, there is always picketers outside the courthouse. The SHRA has people devided, you think suddenly the YA's are going to unite everyone to be for the SHRA?

Have you read the solicits for future issues of "Young Avengers/Runaways?" It's pretty much a certainty that they're going to get shipped off to "42" from those. Something about "being trapped in the most advanced prison ever designed".

Where's your argument now? And the whole "has to be a motion to try them as an adult" doesn't hold any water, because it's already been made clear that the unregistered supers aren't getting accorded due process of law. They'll treat the YA and Runaways no better than they'd treat the Red Skull if they had him in custody. Heck, at the moment the Red Skull would probably get treated -better-. Since suddenly some people seem to think the only real "evil and dangerous" person in the world is an unregistered hero, as opposed to...you know...people with a history of mass-murder, megalomania, and other various and sundry crimes against humanity.

Red Lotus

08-31-2006, 07:20 AM

No, Entrapment is -not- "legal". It gets people out of jail free if it's proven. And in this case, it's a tough call as to whether it'd be entrapment or a "sting".

I dont see how its a tough call. You have wanted criminals who are being actively pursued by the law. So much so that they went in to hiding. They didn’t trick them into breaking the SRA they were already willing breaking the law.

Entrapment would be more if say Firestar was going to class and Stark tricks her into using her powers and when she does he arrests her.

XPac

08-31-2006, 09:15 AM

Morw

08-31-2006, 10:00 AM

That's the point though... we didn't know Hulk killed innocent until they told us.

You're outright labeling him a killer when it's not said in the book. Which to me isn't exactly fair.

If Captain America did kill those people, it would be an important enough fact to mention. And also, from a writers standpoint do you think the idea Millar is trying to convey is that Cap is a murderer now? I kinda doubt it... and if he did, I think it would have been mentioned.

I dont think he wants to convey Cap as a killer but more as a soldier in a war. Lets face it, cap was created for war and in war people die. It is basicly up to the reader to decide if Cap's rebellion is just or not. And I dont think we ever will get an answear to that question, rather an end to the war. The reason I call him a murder is that I dont belive in his side and thinks he act's like a spoile child. ( that's my opinion and you can ofcourse disagree) other here seem to look at him as a mix between a paladin fighitng the good cause against injustice. If they are right then cap has only killed his enemy in war. ( I don t think you would call the soliders in the iraq war for murder when they kill on the battlefield)

To give you an example. throwing a man out of a car in about 40 miles pr houre withoiut a helmet is basicly as save as droping an egg from yard above the ground. If the egg break then the skull breaks. ( try it and do not used hardboild egg) ( im not totally sure about the stats as I heard it in 45 km/pr hour and 1 meter)And the neck simply isnt stronge egnough to stopp your head from hitting the pavment.

Jmacq1

08-31-2006, 10:05 AM

I dont think he wants to convey Cap as a killer but more as a soldier in a war. Lets face it, cap was created for war and in war people die. It is basicly up to the reader to decide if Cap's rebellion is just or not. And I dont think we ever will get an answear to that question, rather an end to the war. The reason I call him a murder is that I dont belive in his side and thinks he act's like a spoile child. ( that's my opinion and you can ofcourse disagree) other here seem to look at him as a mix between a paladin fighitng the good cause against injustice. If they are right then cap has only killed his enemy in war. ( I don t think you would call the soliders in the iraq war for murder when they kill on the battlefield)

To give you an example. throwing a man out of a car in about 40 miles pr houre withoiut a helmet is basicly as save as droping an egg from yard above the ground. If the egg break then the skull breaks. ( try it and do not used hardboild egg) ( im not totally sure about the stats as I heard it in 45 km/pr hour and 1 meter)And the neck simply isnt stronge egnough to stopp your head from hitting the pavment.

Of course, you're not taking into account that the SHIELD issue body armor the guy was wearing may or may not have some kind of protective measure against something like this. (Not saying he necessarily did or didn't, just that it's possible).

Not to mention that the laws of physics and probability are kinda routinely tossed out the window on a pagely basis in the Marvel Universe.

XPac

08-31-2006, 10:11 AM

I dont think he wants to convey Cap as a killer but more as a soldier in a war. Lets face it, cap was created for war and in war people die. It is basicly up to the reader to decide if Cap's rebellion is just or not. And I dont think we ever will get an answear to that question, rather an end to the war. The reason I call him a murder is that I dont belive in his side and thinks he act's like a spoile child. ( that's my opinion and you can ofcourse disagree) other here seem to look at him as a mix between a paladin fighitng the good cause against injustice. If they are right then cap has only killed his enemy in war. ( I don t think you would call the soliders in the iraq war for murder when they kill on the battlefield)

To give you an example. throwing a man out of a car in about 40 miles pr houre withoiut a helmet is basicly as save as droping an egg from yard above the ground. If the egg break then the skull breaks. ( try it and do not used hardboild egg) ( im not totally sure about the stats as I heard it in 45 km/pr hour and 1 meter)And the neck simply isnt stronge egnough to stopp your head from hitting the pavment.

I don't deny that Cap placed him in a situation where the man could die. I'm just saying that if the man died, it would have been mentioned. Frankly SHIELD would have a field say promoting how Caps side is now committing murder.

I don't think it's in character for Cap to kill someone in that situation. I have an easier time suspending my belief that the man survived than I would supsending by belief that Cap is now a murdered (and in this instance, what he did is murder). If they actually tell us that Cap killed them, then I'd think differently.

BigBoss

08-31-2006, 10:12 AM

iron man defintly didint deserved to get his ass kicked bin at all.

Morw

08-31-2006, 01:56 PM

Of course, you're not taking into account that the SHIELD issue body armor the guy was wearing may or may not have some kind of protective measure against something like this. (Not saying he necessarily did or didn't, just that it's possible).

Not to mention that the laws of physics and probability are kinda routinely tossed out the window on a pagely basis in the Marvel Universe.

Can give a man the IM armour but leave the helmet of and the resulkt is the same. the man didnt wear any helmet so it diesnt matter if he had any body armour. its the head that would crak open, not his cheast.

And I can see reasons why they dont want to say it on natinal TV that he killed the SHIELD agent. becouse they would also say that he escaped. Bad thing and that he broke out other superhero. People want the superhero registrated not arrested ora bloody civil war among them. I guess most Humans in MU are now very confused at the behavior of the hero's.

Beside, right now we dont know right now but the logical and the law of physcis and the law on how much damaged a /normal) human can take that eighter he the man died or got serius injured. He was not a superhuman and therfor is not subject to the superhuman law of physics. But he can be okey if a writter proves him to be okey. Marvel has gone more and more away from the if its not seen dead then its not dead version and people have been killed more and more of frame.

XPac

08-31-2006, 02:08 PM

And I can see reasons why they dont want to say it on natinal TV that he killed the SHIELD agent. becouse they would also say that he escaped. Bad thing and that he broke out other superhero. People want the superhero registrated not arrested ora bloody civil war among them. I guess most Humans in MU are now very confused at the behavior of the hero's.

Even if it's something that SHIELD wouldn't want exposed in the media (which I don't buy since it can easily be spun into a situation that benefits them, not unlike how the spun Caps escape from the Hellicarrier in the first issue), you don't imagine SHIELD or the heroes themselves talking about Cap murdering someone?

In varios books, many many people from Tigra to Radioactive Man have used the simple fact that they are opposing Cap as a reason question whether they're doing the right thing or not. Mentioning the fact that Cap is a murderer would put to rest such doubts pretty easily, if in fact that was the case.

And beyond that, if Millar decided that Cap was now a murdered, don't you think it's something he'd want to convey with some level of clarity since it is a bit of a departure from the status quo?

Jeff-E

08-31-2006, 08:37 PM

Have you read the solicits for future issues of "Young Avengers/Runaways?" It's pretty much a certainty that they're going to get shipped off to "42" from those. Something about "being trapped in the most advanced prison ever designed".

Where's your argument now? And the whole "has to be a motion to try them as an adult" doesn't hold any water, because it's already been made clear that the unregistered supers aren't getting accorded due process of law. They'll treat the YA and Runaways no better than they'd treat the Red Skull if they had him in custody. Heck, at the moment the Red Skull would probably get treated -better-. Since suddenly some people seem to think the only real "evil and dangerous" person in the world is an unregistered hero, as opposed to...you know...people with a history of mass-murder, megalomania, and other various and sundry crimes against humanity.

Ok dude, here goes

1)don't get snippy with me, I thought I was having a civil discussion about the topic at hand.

2) Don't read spoilers like they are the gospel, I have atleast 3 issues of spidey alone where it proclaims either someone dies or that he dies, and yet lo and behold Spidey and most of his supporting cast are still a'kickin'.

3) Obviously you're on that "Evil devil incarnate rat bastard government can't do any thing right sonsabitches" band wagon and for that I send my condolences.

4) Read my posts most were about why the YA's and RA's would get different treatment because of their minor status, the rest however have surrendered their rights once they became criminals and as such would get shipped to either the Negative Zone jail or whatever 42 is if it isn't the Negative zone jail.

5) Sure the arguement holds water, the arguement I presented was about the treatment of minors, not everyone else I introduced a variable in to the equation. That was kind of the point.

6) It's not that the hero's are the worst thing out there they are just making the worst choice right now. Had they all just gone underground and waited instead of poking their heads up every 10 seconds just to piss people off the registered hero's probably would have gone after villians first. Captain America ensured that an example had to be made when he captured 16 villians or whatever in 48 hours, and don't give me that he was doing his job garbage because a) people don't buy that phrase when attached to the proreg side, and b) if it was just his job, why didn't he do all that 48 hours prior, when it was still legal. He was trying to send a message and all it did was made sure there was a huge bullseye on his and the Secret Avengers backs.

7) Ever wonder who that dude was in Frontline 5? Kind of reminded me of Cap, and what was one of the things he said, about there not being a sinister agenda behind the SHRA, just alot of scared Americans or something along those lines. No sinister agenda, that always just kind of made me wonder... hmmm, maybe they i.e. the MU's Government are just doing what it thinks is right for its people.

Markavian

09-01-2006, 09:11 AM

Ok dude, here goes

1)don't get snippy with me, I thought I was having a civil discussion about the topic at hand.

2) Don't read spoilers like they are the gospel, I have atleast 3 issues of spidey alone where it proclaims either someone dies or that he dies, and yet lo and behold Spidey and most of his supporting cast are still a'kickin'.

3) Obviously you're on that "Evil devil incarnate rat bastard government can't do any thing right sonsabitches" band wagon and for that I send my condolences.

4) Read my posts most were about why the YA's and RA's would get different treatment because of their minor status, the rest however have surrendered their rights once they became criminals and as such would get shipped to either the Negative Zone jail or whatever 42 is if it isn't the Negative zone jail.

5) Sure the arguement holds water, the arguement I presented was about the treatment of minors, not everyone else I introduced a variable in to the equation. That was kind of the point.

6) It's not that the hero's are the worst thing out there they are just making the worst choice right now. Had they all just gone underground and waited instead of poking their heads up every 10 seconds just to piss people off the registered hero's probably would have gone after villians first. Captain America ensured that an example had to be made when he captured 16 villians or whatever in 48 hours, and don't give me that he was doing his job garbage because a) people don't buy that phrase when attached to the proreg side, and b) if it was just his job, why didn't he do all that 48 hours prior, when it was still legal. He was trying to send a message and all it did was made sure there was a huge bullseye on his and the Secret Avengers backs.

7) Ever wonder who that dude was in Frontline 5? Kind of reminded me of Cap, and what was one of the things he said, about there not being a sinister agenda behind the SHRA, just alot of scared Americans or something along those lines. No sinister agenda, that always just kind of made me wonder... hmmm, maybe they i.e. the MU's Government are just doing what it thinks is right for its people.
Lets keep it civil folks no matter which side we support in civil war ,Please? All sides have valid points and isssues to make as well as their own Opinons. We All love The MU and we all want the Same thing GREAT ADVENTURES Therein!! Tony and Steve want the Same thing in the end as well .They just disagree on how to get there(Safety justice security laws obeyed Liberty for all etc) And are fighting for the steering wheel ;)

Morw

09-01-2006, 09:23 AM

Even if it's something that SHIELD wouldn't want exposed in the media (which I don't buy since it can easily be spun into a situation that benefits them, not unlike how the spun Caps escape from the Hellicarrier in the first issue), you don't imagine SHIELD or the heroes themselves talking about Cap murdering someone?

In varios books, many many people from Tigra to Radioactive Man have used the simple fact that they are opposing Cap as a reason question whether they're doing the right thing or not. Mentioning the fact that Cap is a murderer would put to rest such doubts pretty easily, if in fact that was the case.

And beyond that, if Millar decided that Cap was now a murdered, don't you think it's something he'd want to convey with some level of clarity since it is a bit of a departure from the status quo?

Well, you have to take in account how superhero's have been dealing with these of death. ( that is the reason for the act) It seems to be something you dont talk about. Also remeber that the act is not so old that everybody would know. After all there where no pro superhero present and SHIELD might have a reson to kep that fact away from the press right now.
what if:
SHIELD belives that Cap and his group will soon get captured and then there will be a trail on national TV. Cap with his carisma andability to give speeches will most defently have a good chance in that court room. So they need some hidden cards.
They also might belive that cap might get more violent if he knows he is wanted for police murder, and telling people about it might tip Cap of.
The third and most important thing is that SHIELD might not even know it was cap doing the deed, as he was undercover and if the man is dead then he cant tell who it was that pushed him out of the car.

BloodstoneFreak

09-01-2006, 09:04 PM

I wouldn't say Cap deserved it, but it was a nice twist. I enjoyed it and I'm on Cap's side. Those moments have to be present or the comic's just not worth reading. What I really liked about it, though, was how Herc went ape$h!t. Too bad he was taken down by Thor.

Bobster777

09-01-2006, 09:07 PM

I think he deserved it. More importantly than that, IM had to make sure Cap was down for the count. Cap is the glue that holds the entire resistance together. If I was in IM's position, I would do whatever I could (short of killing the guy) to make sure that he doesn't get away again.

-S-Man-

09-02-2006, 04:37 AM

Morw

09-02-2006, 05:18 AM

NOPE, He didn't deserve it...he was out-numbered.

So if the police outnumber a criminal and that criminalo start to shoot shoot around and killing the police they should not return fire? The argument is pretty thin.

Markavian

09-02-2006, 05:47 AM

It wasn't a fair fight. I mean cap was under the pressure of getting his men (and women) out of there without more casualties i.e. Wiccan and Cloak. He didn't even have his shield I would love to see that fight again but Cap with his shield. I know IM would have won anyway but Cap wouldn't have been beaten to a pulp.

NOPE, He didn't deserve it...he was out-numbered.
Beat on an Helpless Iron Man whos face was exposed and his armor locked up.Its amusing to hear it said "The Fight wasnt fair" When Cap used an underhanded means to try and bring down Iron Man then when it failed he paid the price for what he did,How is that unfair I ask you?:rolleyes:

Nomad

09-02-2006, 07:19 AM

Beat on an Helpless Iron Man whos face was exposed and his armor locked up.Its amusing to hear it said "The Fight wasnt fair" When Cap used an underhanded means to try and bring down Iron Man then when it failed he paid the price for what he did,How is that unfair I ask you?:rolleyes:

Oh, poor baby Iron Man has his face exposed?

Jeff-E

09-02-2006, 07:22 AM

Oh, poor baby Iron Man has his face exposed?

Yeah, but in the end Cap gota' whuppin!!

-S-Man-

09-02-2006, 02:58 PM

So if the police outnumber a criminal and that criminalo start to shoot shoot around and killing the police they should not return fire? The argument is pretty thin.
You can't compare Captain America to a generic criminal. He was at the scene to save lives and he was ambushed so he was pi$$ed off (big-time) and IM did go over the top. He could hear Herc shouting his head off and he kept on going.

Beat on an Helpless Iron Man whos face was exposed and his armor locked up.Its amusing to hear it said "The Fight wasnt fair" When Cap used an underhanded means to try and bring down Iron Man then when it failed he paid the price for what he did,How is that unfair I ask you? I don't think that one punch deserves two pluse.

Ult. Fireboy

09-02-2006, 03:07 PM

Cap did not deserve to get the crap beat out of him. It will only make him madder.

Kid Kamikaze10

09-02-2006, 03:09 PM

The scene fit it's purpose. I'm quite neutral about the whole thing.

Kid Kamikaze10

09-02-2006, 03:11 PM

And I don't feel bad about Tony getting hit either, that fit it's purpose, too.

Not to mention, Cap getting hit by Tony hurt a lot more than Tony, who's now superhuman, getting hit by Cap, so I don't feel bad for Tony either.

humorbot5

09-02-2006, 03:11 PM

He deserved it

Ult. Fireboy

09-02-2006, 03:14 PM

I wonder how the fight from the ending of CW 3 will end?:evilsmile

Trolt

09-02-2006, 06:35 PM

It's all part of Stark's plan.

You see, he owns the Steve's dental plan company, and decided to make a few quick bucks by loosening his teeth!

Short of backstabbing, only dr.strange,sentry and wolverine can save Captain america. I'm really curious as to how steve's gonna escape.

Ult. Fireboy

09-02-2006, 07:21 PM

[ I'm really curious as to how steve's gonna escape.[/QUOTE]
Same Here, I have been waiting for someone to say that! I really don't know?
Hercules was gonna help, but got struck by lightning.

XPac

09-02-2006, 09:43 PM

Well, you have to take in account how superhero's have been dealing with these of death. ( that is the reason for the act) It seems to be something you dont talk about. Also remeber that the act is not so old that everybody would know. After all there where no pro superhero present and SHIELD might have a reson to kep that fact away from the press right now.
what if:
SHIELD belives that Cap and his group will soon get captured and then there will be a trail on national TV. Cap with his carisma andability to give speeches will most defently have a good chance in that court room. So they need some hidden cards.
They also might belive that cap might get more violent if he knows he is wanted for police murder, and telling people about it might tip Cap of.
The third and most important thing is that SHIELD might not even know it was cap doing the deed, as he was undercover and if the man is dead then he cant tell who it was that pushed him out of the car.

Well, I did ask and Tom said Cap didn't kill those people. So they haven't killed anyone yet. Of course there's a big battle going on right now so i suppose that could change. But I'll personally betting any death tolls that occur will have the ANTI-side on the receiving end.

And if that's the case (again, I'm just specuating) we'll really put to the test the whole issue of accuntability. A bit part of the registration has been the notion of heroes being accountable for their actions. But I've personally been wondering whether registering makes heroes LESS accountable since SHIELD might just sweep such things underneath the rug. It'll be interesting to see how that pans out.

Bobster777

09-03-2006, 07:45 AM

Well, I did ask and Tom said Cap didn't kill those people. So they haven't killed anyone yet. Of course there's a big battle going on right now so i suppose that could change. But I'll personally betting any death tolls that occur will have the ANTI-side on the receiving end.

And if that's the case (again, I'm just specuating) we'll really put to the test the whole issue of accuntability. A bit part of the registration has been the notion of heroes being accountable for their actions. But I've personally been wondering whether registering makes heroes LESS accountable since SHIELD might just sweep such things underneath the rug. It'll be interesting to see how that pans out.
Ahh, good point. Yeah, it will be really interesting to see how the death occurs in CW4. If it happens in self-defense, then it won't need to be justified. For instance, while it is investigated, cops for the most part are not prosecuted when killing a criminal who goes at them with lethal force.

Morw

09-03-2006, 11:19 AM

Well, I did ask and Tom said Cap didn't kill those people. So they haven't killed anyone yet. Of course there's a big battle going on right now so i suppose that could change. But I'll personally betting any death tolls that occur will have the ANTI-side on the receiving end.

And if that's the case (again, I'm just specuating) we'll really put to the test the whole issue of accuntability. A bit part of the registration has been the notion of heroes being accountable for their actions. But I've personally been wondering whether registering makes heroes LESS accountable since SHIELD might just sweep such things underneath the rug. It'll be interesting to see how that pans out.

If they say he survied then he must be superhuman, wonder if he is registrated :P

T'achli

09-05-2006, 07:43 PM

regestration sucks GO CAP GO!!!!!!

Ult. Fireboy

09-05-2006, 07:47 PM

regestration sucks GO CAP GO!!!!!!
WITH YOU ALL THE WAY, BROTHER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:D :cool: ;)

KrymynalChylde

09-09-2006, 09:46 PM

jaxcs

09-10-2006, 01:12 AM

Meh, I think Cap needs his ass kicked...again...for the third time....
hahahahaha SCREW CAPTAIN AMERICA!!! That "pampered punk" WILL hand you your ass EVERY-TIME. Hahahahaha man i hate those whiney antis

That's right I'm with you bro. Hey, you spelled criminal 'krymynal' and child 'chylde'. That's not standard English. Sorry, your failure to conform means you must go to the extra-dimensional gulag. See ya.

Markavian

09-10-2006, 01:17 AM

Of A Diplomat Father and a Member of the Young Socialist club in the 1930's......... His calling Tony Stark a Spoiled Brat is like the Pot calling the Kettle Black :p :D :rolleyes:

Nomad

09-10-2006, 01:20 AM

Of A Diplomat Father and a Member of the Young Socialist club in the 1930's......... His calling Tony Stark a Spoiled Brat is like the Pot calling the Kettle Black :p :D :rolleyes:
Poor people are better than rich people. Cap used to sleep in a sleeping bag in falcon's office. He's never owned anything that wasn't destroyed by baron zemo. He has every right to hate that alkie and his toys.

nowitatall

09-10-2006, 01:50 AM

Personally, I don't much like Iron Man.. I hope ol' Mr. Stark winds up dead or retired at the end of the Civil War..There have been murmurs about Pym being the new Iron Man post-Civil War, and I have to admit, I like that possibility..

jaxcs

09-10-2006, 04:07 PM

Of A Diplomat Father and a Member of the Young Socialist club in the 1930's......... His calling Tony Stark a Spoiled Brat is like the Pot calling the Kettle Black :p :D :rolleyes:

Cap was part of the Young Socialist Club? Really? No seriously, really? Didn't know that. Is this cannon?

But being a young socialist or not hardly signifies that he is pampered. Iron man is pampered and it isn't an act like Bruce Wayne either. Cap acts like he like takes his vitamins and drinks 3 glasses of milk a day.

Doom Hammer

09-10-2006, 04:14 PM

XPac

09-10-2006, 04:49 PM

Tony wanted to work something out with Captain America's group, to reolve the conflict peacefully without taking them in. He did what he had to to draw them out and make them stay, but they he removed his mask and offered his hand.

Cap sucker-punched him with some technological whosawhatsit and knocked his ass out. He forfeited the chance to reolve the situation peacefully, and by opening the door to a physical confrontation, got what he had coming to him. Hell yeah, Cap deserved to get knocked around, and Tony was only doing what he had to. It didn't have to be like that, but if Steve is going to refuse to compromise or even discuss the matter, there is no reason Tony should go easy on him.

You can't argue about resolving peacefully AFTER opening fire on the other team. The door to physical confrotnation was opened the split second Caps side got there.

I don't think it's fair to knock Caps side for retaliating after his side was already attacked, nor do I think it's fair to knock Cap for hitting a sucker punch after Tony's side lied to them to get them there in the first place.

You either have to knock both sides or neither, since they both basically did the same thing. They BOTH used deciet and violence.

Doom Hammer

09-10-2006, 05:02 PM

You can't argue about resolving peacefully AFTER opening fire on the other team. The door to physical confrotnation was opened the split second Caps side got there.

That was only to ensure that the rebels would not run. They are, after all, criminals, and they have to be stopped. Had they declined Tony's offer, they'd have been apprehended. The situation was clear: the rebels were criminals, Tony's group was the authority. They drew them out to apprehend them for this very reason. However, Tony offered a peaceful alternative, and Cap declined. Therefore, he started a fight when another option was available, and Tony was just plain stronger than him. You can't fault Tony for retaliating, especially after being sucker-punched.

I don't think it's fair to knock Caps side for retaliating after his side was already attacked, nor do I think it's fair to knock Cap for hitting a sucker punch after Tony's side lied to them to get them there in the first place.

The thing is, his team was not randomly attacked. The teleporters were removed from the equation. Tony's not stupid, and he has to resolve the conflict. He could have drew them out (it's called a sting) and annihilated them and been in the right, since Cap's crew is by law criminals, like it or not. Instead, he offered them a peaceful alternative, and Captain America threw it in his face.

You either have to knock both sides or neither, since they both basically did the same thing. They BOTH used deciet and violence.

Tony organized a sting operation to apprehend a group of criminals. He took out their mode of transportation, and having them in one place, tried to reason with them. Tony's goal was a peaceful resolution in spite of his methods. Steve agreed to talk, then sucker-punched Tony and started a fight. Steve's goal was to beat people up and run away, with a complete disregard for the law. There is a difference.

Nomad

09-10-2006, 05:06 PM

"Oh, Tony! You got me!! Let's here what you have to say, and if I disagree, it will be like the hellicarrier all over again. Friends?"

Haven't you ever seen butch and sundance?

XPac

09-10-2006, 05:09 PM

That was only to ensure that the rebels would not run. They are, after all, criminals, and they have to be stopped. Had they declined Tony's offer, they'd have been apprehended. The situation was clear: the rebels were criminals, Tony's group was the authority. They drew them out to apprehend them for this very reason. However, Tony offered a peaceful alternative, and Cap declined. Therefore, he started a fight when another option was available, and Tony was just plain stronger than him. You can't fault Tony for retaliating, especially after being sucker-punched.

The thing is, his team was not randomly attacked. The teleporters were removed from the equation. Tony's not stupid, and he has to resolve the conflict. He could have drew them out (it's called a sting) and annihilated them and been in the right, since Cap's crew is by law criminals, like it or not. Instead, he offered them a peaceful alternative, and Captain America threw it in his face.

Tony organized a sting operation to apprehend a group of criminals. He took out their mode of transportation, and having them in one place, tried to reason with them. Tony's goal was a peaceful resolution in spite of his methods. Steve agreed to talk, then sucker-punched Tony and started a fight. Steve's goal was to beat people up and run away, with a complete disregard for the law. There is a difference.

I'm not saying what Tony did wasn't smart or effective... just saying he loses the right to claim the higher ground by using both deception and violence. All Cap did was return the favor. You can't say Cap started the fight after Tony already shot at them. The first act of violence occured on Tony's side. Was it a practical move? Yes... but it was still an act of violence. Caps actions afterwards were retaliations to that, and Cap even said so by mentioned the people Tony shot at when he made his move.

If all Tony wanted to do was talk, he could have done so at Black Panther's wedding. But he wasn't interested in talking or a peaceful sollution... he was just interested in capturing them. Note that when that wasn't an option even when he was face to face with Cap in Wakanda, he wasn't terribly interested in having a conversation.

Doom Hammer

09-10-2006, 05:18 PM

"Oh, Tony! You got me!! Let's here what you have to say, and if I disagree, it will be like the hellicarrier all over again. Friends?"

Haven't you ever seen butch and sundance?

Captain America is a criminal. It's not like he has a lot of options. Tony offered him an alternative to being hunted -- not because he had to, but because he wanted to end the conflict peacefully and come to some kind of understanding. He was trying to be a friend, even if he had to trick Cap into being reasonable.

And it's not like he was saying "Surrender or die!", he was saying, "let's talk about this before it gets out of control, Steve. Shake my hand."

And Steve sucker-punched Tony. Well when you do that, Iron Man beats your ass, and then Thor comes to kill all your d00ds. Nice call, Captain America.

XPac

09-10-2006, 05:23 PM

Captain America is a criminal. It's not like he has a lot of options. Tony offered him an alternative to being hunted -- not because he had to, but because he wanted to end the conflict peacefully and come to some kind of understanding. He was trying to be a friend, even if he had to trick Cap into being reasonable.

And it's not like he was saying "Surrender or die!", he was saying, "let's talk about this before it gets out of control, Steve. Shake my hand."

And Steve sucker-punched Tony. Well when you do that, Iron Man beats your ass, and then Thor comes to kill all your d00ds. Nice call, Captain America.

If Thor's a murderer and Tony and Hill sent him out there, then I'd say Tony and Hill get the credit for making the call they did.

If this is what it means to be heroes under the registration, then I imagine Cap feels pretty good about the call he made in trying to fight it. We've seen Hill's brand of Justice in the Savange Land, and we're seeing it here.

Doom Hammer

09-10-2006, 05:24 PM

I'm not saying what Tony did wasn't smart or effective... just saying he loses the right to claim the higher ground by using both deception and violence. All Cap did was return the favor. You can't say Cap started the fight after Tony already shot at them. The first act of violence occured on Tony's side. Was it a practical move? Yes... but it was still an act of violence. Caps actions afterwards were retaliations to that, and Cap even said so by mentioned the people Tony shot at when he made his move.

It might be a bit shady to trick Cap, it might be a bit shady to tranq his guys. But this operation -- which again, is a sting, and is frequently used and legal -- was for the purpose of resolving the conflict peacefully. Do you really deny that, had Captain America accepted, the means didn't justify the ends? The country heals and the super-heroes present a unified front, while Wiccan and Cloak are a little groggy? Come on.

If all Tony wanted to do was talk, he could have done so at Black Panther's wedding. But he wasn't interested in talking or a peaceful sollution... he was just interested in capturing them. Note that when that wasn't an option even when he was face to face with Cap in Wakanda, he wasn't terribly interested in having a conversation.

You're not going to like this, but Reginald Hudlin is a hack who cares nothing for previously-established characters or continuity. The Wedding had nothing to do with Civil War, but that banner sure did boost sales.

If all he wanted to do was capture them, he would've just come down on them from the start. The rebels are crazily outmatched, Tony would've just come out full-bore with Thor and the other heroes and defeated them. He wanted to avoid that. But Captain America had his ego bruised, so he got whipped and got a team member killed. So again, were the means worth the ends in Cap's case? What did he even accomplish, and was it worth the cost?

XPac

09-10-2006, 05:29 PM

Do you really deny that, had Captain America accepted, the means didn't justify the ends? The country heals and the super-heroes present a unified front, while Wiccan and Cloak are a little groggy? Come on.

I'll deny it... I don't think anything is gained by a corrupt SHIELD being in control of the entire superhero community (especially as SHIELD is a UN organization that isn't technically accountable to the US government or people in the first place).

Cap surrendinger will stop the fighting, but not the problem.

As for the Wedding... if Marvel states that it happens out of continuity then I'll withdraw the point. Till them, I'm under the impression that it occured in continuity, showing that Iron Man isn't that interested in talking unless he has them captured.

Doom Hammer

09-10-2006, 05:31 PM

If Thor's a murderer and Tony and Hill sent him out there, then I'd say Tony and Hill get the credit for making the call they did.

He was the nuclear option. They wanted to resolve the conflict peacefully, but after that, what can they do? Cap and his crew are criminals, and they have to be taken down. They had every option to register or even not register and discuss the situation. When they absolutely refuse to hear the voice of reason, there's only one option left.

If this is what it means to be heroes under the registration, then I imagine Cap feels pretty good about the call he made in trying to fight it. We've seen Hill's brand of Justice in the Savange Land, and we're seeing it here.

What did Hill do in the Savage Land? Kill a bunch of corrupt SHIELD agents?

All I'm saying is that the Pro-Registration Organization extended every olive branch and compromise they could, and this all could've been avoided by just a little compromise.

XPac

09-10-2006, 05:36 PM

He was the nuclear option. They wanted to resolve the conflict peacefully, but after that, what can they do? Cap and his crew are criminals, and they have to be taken down. They had every option to register or even not register and discuss the situation. When they absolutely refuse to hear the voice of reason, there's only one option left.

What did Hill do in the Savage Land? Kill a bunch of corrupt SHIELD agents?

All I'm saying is that the Pro-Registration Organization extended every olive branch and compromise they could, and this all could've been avoided by just a little compromise.

No, Thor wasn't the only option left. Iron Man by himself had a descent chance at being able to beat Caps entire side. Lethal force was completely unecessary as Caps side was both underpowered and undermanned.

And as for what Hill did in the Savage Land... you'll note that there were innocent Savage Land natives standing next to those suppossedly corrupt SHIELD agents. Hill murdered them plain and simple.

Again, using the nuclear option when it wasn't necessarily in the least. If Hills way of doing things is to murderer people, it's no wonder people like Cap are opposing it.

Doom Hammer

09-10-2006, 05:38 PM

I'll deny it... I don't think anything is gained by a corrupt SHIELD being in control of the entire superhero community (especially as SHIELD is a UN organization that isn't technically accountable to the US government or people in the first place).

Cap surrendinger will stop the fighting, but not the problem.

And Cap was given the opportunity to be granted amnest for his criminal activity and join up with all his former teammates to make absolutely sure that the power is not abused and to fight corruption from within, where he can actually make a difference. He was given the opportunity to actually fix the problem. The rebellion means nothing, it accomplishes nothing. He's not going to stop the corruption by fighting the people who want the program to succeed WITHOUT corruption. He made the wrong choice, he picked a fight, and he got his ass kicked. So I guess he made the wrong decision for two reasons.

As for the Wedding... if Marvel states that it happens out of continuity then I'll withdraw the point. Till them, I'm under the impression that it occured in continuity, showing that Iron Man isn't that interested in talking unless he has them captured.

Fair enough, but that's a weak argument. Reggie has shown a marked ignorance of all things relating to continuity, and when Tony's actions in the Wedding contradict his offer in the main Civil War book...well, the latter is much more credible than the former.

Doom Hammer

09-10-2006, 05:43 PM

No, Thor wasn't the only option left. Iron Man by himself had a descent chance at being able to beat Caps entire side. Lethal force was completely unecessary as Caps side was both underpowered and undermanned.

I don't see Hill demanding anyone kill anyone, so you have to assume that Thor's decision has nothing to do with registration. And yeah, it was a reasonable decision. Cap made it clear he wouldn't listen to reason, and he picked a fight, so of course Hill and Tony aren't going to take any chances. They dropped the hammer.

And as for what Hill did in the Savage Land... you'll note that there were innocent Savage Land natives standing next to those suppossedly corrupt SHIELD agents. Hill murdered them plain and simple.

Again, using the nuclear option when it wasn't necessarily in the least. If Hills way of doing things is to murderer people, it's no wonder people like Cap are opposing it.

And Steve could've actually had some influence on this policy had he talked with Tony. That's all. Instead, he caused a big mess. And I do blame him, because you can't blame SHIELD for using force in order to apprehend criminals. They clearly did not want that outcome, but force was all that was left.

XPac

09-10-2006, 05:45 PM

Fair enough, but that's a weak argument. Reggie has shown a marked ignorance of all things relating to continuity, and when Tony's actions in the Wedding contradict his offer in the main Civil War book...well, the latter is much more credible than the former.

That's the problem... I don't think there's a contradiction.

There are means to talk to at least TRY to talk to Caps side besides trying to trap them. Black Panthers wedding was an example of that. But instead Tony chose to trap them... and I won't knock the idea for not being smart, but he was basically overing an olive brance at gunpoint. That means very little.

The fact of the matter is Tony felt this was coming MONTHS before Stamford even happened. Maybe THAT would have been the time to talk if that's what he really wanted. Yet he didn't bother talking to anyone about it them, did he. He kept it a secret from the other heroes, while he plotted exactly what he wanted to happen.

Tony isn't interested in talking... just manipuating. Panters wedding was in a situation where he couldn't do that, so he didn't even bother to try. Just like he didn't bother to try months before the bill even popped up on the radar.

XPac

09-10-2006, 05:51 PM

I don't see Hill demanding anyone kill anyone, so you have to assume that Thor's decision has nothing to do with registration. And yeah, it was a reasonable decision. Cap made it clear he wouldn't listen to reason, and he picked a fight, so of course Hill and Tony aren't going to take any chances. They dropped the hammer.

And Steve could've actually had some influence on this policy had he talked with Tony. That's all. Instead, he caused a big mess. And I do blame him, because you can't blame SHIELD for using force in order to apprehend criminals. They clearly did not want that outcome, but force was all that was left.

Hill wasn't demanding anyone to kill anyone? What, did some SHIELD agent just accidentally nuke those people in the Savage Land?

As for whether or not their decisions are reasonable... perhaps they are, but if lethal force is used when it's not necessary then I can't agree it's right. That's the difference between Caps side and Tony's side... they're less heroes now and more agents of SHIELD. And I'll wager when all is said and done, a good number of people on Tonys side will walk away wondering if they're on the right side because of it. You obviusly don't have a problem with how SHIELD and Tony are doing things... but I'll wager plenty of people on Tonys side will feel differently. But we'll see.

As for talking to Tony about influencing policy.. as I argued in a different post if that's what Tony really wanted they could have had this conversation MONTHs ago.

Doom Hammer

09-10-2006, 05:56 PM

That's the problem... I don't think there's a contradiction.

There are means to talk to at least TRY to talk to Caps side besides trying to trap them. Black Panthers wedding was an example of that. But instead Tony chose to trap them... and I won't knock the idea for not being smart, but he was basically overing an olive brance at gunpoint. That means very little.

If there was a legitimate argument between Captain America and Iron Man, I'd agree with you. The sting would have been unnecesary.

But right now, there's not. Steve is a criminal, Tony has to bring him in. He organized the sting to take them all out should the need arise, but that's not what he wanted. And instead of beating his ass into a pulp, Tony offered him partnership. They could've fought together from within the system. Instead, Steve's back to fighting for nothing. And now he's broken and his teammate's dead. All I'm saying.

The fact of the matter is Tony felt this was coming MONTHS before Stamford even happened. Maybe THAT would have been the time to talk if that's what he really wanted. Yet he didn't bother talking to anyone about it them, did he. He kept it a secret from the other heroes, while he plotted exactly what he wanted to happen.

He wasn't in favor of registration, he was doing what he could to prevent it. When it became inevitable, however, he wised up and decided to fight the bad from within the system, where he could actually have some influence. Apparently Steve doesn't have that foresight.

Tony isn't interested in talking... just manipuating. Panters wedding was in a situation where he couldn't do that, so he didn't even bother to try. Just like he didn't bother to try months before the bill even popped up on the radar.

He did a lot in the months before. He tried to get the Illuminati to support it to keep it honest. They didn't go for it. He tried to stop its passage all together. He couldn't do it. Now he's doing what he can with what could be a very bad situation, and its being exacerbated by Steve's worthless rebellion.

I haven't even read the Wedding issue, but I'll give that to you. I can't just ignore it, no matter how I'd like to. Can we just say Tony fell off the wagon for a day? :o

Even if he made the wrong decision that day, he came to his sense. He was pissed, he felt betrayed and angered by Steve's decision which he knew was destructive. He doesn't want to fight him, he wants to fight together with him. Failing that, he wants to bring him down, should the need arise.

Doom Hammer

09-10-2006, 06:03 PM

Hill wasn't demanding anyone to kill anyone? What, did some SHIELD agent just accidentally nuke those people in the Savage Land?

My bad, I was referring to Thor. I'm sure she sent down the order for the Savage Land. It was a bad decision and she's new, but she's shown inprovement in judgement. I don't think she personally is corrupt, just...naive, at least by comparison to Nick Fury.

As for whether or not their decisions are reasonable... perhaps they are, but if lethal force is used when it's not necessary then I can't agree it's right. That's the difference between Caps side and Tony's side... they're less heroes now and more agents of SHIELD. And I'll wager when all is said and done, a good number of people on Tonys side will walk away wondering if they're on the right side because of it. You obviusly don't have a problem with how SHIELD and Tony are doing things... but I'll wager plenty of people on Tonys side will feel differently. But we'll see.

I have a problem with a lot of the pro-registration policies, but I agree with registration at its most basic level. Had Steve done the smart thing, he and Tony could've hammered out the problems and difference in the system. It would've been something EVERYONE -- fans and characters alike -- could've gotten behind. Captain America and Iron Man have enough clout to influence policy. But instead, they're fighting a hopeless battle, and the real casualties of the thing are their shared goals.

As for talking to Tony about influencing policy.. as I argued in a different post if that's what Tony really wanted they could have had this conversation MONTHs ago.

And he took a lot of different steps to make sure this didn't happen, and he DID start doing these things months ago. Unfortunately, nobody's perfect, and his plans did not work out. But he's doing the smart thing, and he's doing what he can.

Doom Hammer

09-10-2006, 06:13 PM

As much as I've enjoyed our discussion, XPac, I have to go. I hope there's no ill-will because I've honestly enjoyed having a basically snark-free in-depth discussion with someone who's not completely close-minde. You have made very good points, and I appreciate that this was an actual discussion and not a personal mud-slinging argument. I think we share more common ground than you might think.

Just wanted you to know I'm not avoiding answering any further posts.

Wind-Breaker

09-10-2006, 06:22 PM

When it comes right down to this paticular incident, there are failures on both sides in the effort to prevent it.

Yes, Stark could have talked to Cap during the Panther/Storm wedding.

But... Cap after Hill trying to ambush him, should tried to contacted Stark ASAP about it and been like "do you know what she tried to pull on me?..etc"

Yes, Stark was unethical when came to pretending that people were in danger to lure in Cap.

But... Cap had a bigger problem than Thor or any of Stark's forces.... and thats not having a plan of action when it comes to how to somehow reverse the SHRA! To date Cap has only planned on rescuing fellow anti-regs and try to fight crime at the same time. Its a futile plan, he should try a plan of action that would somehow reverse the law, or cripple SHEILD, or something! If they just plan on running the whole time then they might as well leave the country. If the best plan of action for SHRA is a plan cooked up by your arch arch-enemy ZEMO, then your screwed.

XPac

09-10-2006, 06:25 PM

I have a problem with a lot of the pro-registration policies, but I agree with registration at its most basic level. Had Steve done the smart thing, he and Tony could've hammered out the problems and difference in the system. It would've been something EVERYONE -- fans and characters alike -- could've gotten behind. Captain America and Iron Man have enough clout to influence policy. But instead, they're fighting a hopeless battle, and the real casualties of the thing are their shared goals.

And he took a lot of different steps to make sure this didn't happen, and he DID start doing these things months ago. Unfortunately, nobody's perfect, and his plans did not work out. But he's doing the smart thing, and he's doing what he can.

Well, the thing is at heart the registration really isn't that bad an idea. Take away SHIELD, take away the negatize zone prison, take away the issue of unregistered combatants losing their rights, and you have a reasonable idea.

If Tony had made the rest of the superhero community aware of the problem, they could have ALL spent the previous months discussing this openly out in the public before Stamford ever took place. Had Cap and the superhero community as a whole been a part of the process right from the start, perhaps it could have been something a bit more reasonable.

As it stand now, there are too many things wrong with the registration for it NOT to be fought. Ideally that fight should have taken place before it became a law but that didn't happen. Now they are in a position where an unjust law needs to be either accepted or fought. Maybe Caps actions are ultimately futile and meaningless... we'll have to wait and see how it turns out.

But Tony for whatever reason kept it quit except with other members of the Illuminati. He did go to Washington, but again had he discussed the issue with Cap and the others and allowed them to work with him on this perhaps things might have ended up differently.

XPac

09-10-2006, 06:40 PM

But... Cap had a bigger problem than Thor or any of Stark's forces.... and thats not having a plan of action when it comes to how to somehow reverse the SHRA! To date Cap has only planned on rescuing fellow anti-regs and try to fight crime at the same time. Its a futile plan, he should try a plan of action that would somehow reverse the law, or cripple SHEILD, or something! If they just plan on running the whole time then they might as well leave the country. If the best plan of action for SHRA is a plan cooked up by your arch arch-enemy ZEMO, then your screwed.

So far Cap doesn't seem to have a plan (or if he does, Millar isn't having Cap express it). But I think the bigger issue is what can Cap do?

Surrendering and fighting it in the courts is a pretty iffy choice since we've already seen with Speedball that unregistered combatants apparently lose their rights. And getting locked in the negative zone, a place with potentially bad effects on one's mental stability, isn't exactly a check in the plus column either.

He can choose to run away, but he still wants to help people and stop the badguys. He can't do that if he leaves the country. And if you're Cap, helping people is more important than protecting your own hide. It's a pretty bad dilema when you've got principals to the degree that Cap does.

And he certainly doesn't want to attack his friends or well meaning government agents if he can help it. As it stands, his plan is seemingly to go out and fight the badguys, only classing with SHIELD and Tonys side when it's necessary. And so far it's a very short sighted plan if there's not more to it (though it's one that I think Cap for the most part can at least keep his ideals intact with... Tony right now probably has trouble saying that).

We'll have to see how it turns out. I'm assuming Millar will eventually create some kind of goal or agenda for Cap beyond just running and hiding. There's gotta be more to the story than that.

Karthak

09-11-2006, 02:40 AM

[QUOTE=Disc13]But Captain America had to be stubborn and instead of listening, decides to immediately resort to violence.

Captain America sneakily attacked first against a more powerful opponent, initiating the fight, and deserved to have his ass kicked. I don't see any reason that would falsify this claim, but please, prove me wrong if you can.
QUOTE]
Well, I can prove you wrong right now. As I recall, Cap didn´t attack first. It was Tony who had two of cap´s men (wiccan and cloak) to use your word, "sneakily" knocked out.

Brady

09-11-2006, 06:27 PM

Haunt

09-11-2006, 06:32 PM

Iron Man lured Caps team into an ambush and then had two of them bushwhacked (one a teenager) before they even knew what was going on. Sure Iron Man is correct according to the letter of the law, but he's clearly going about it in a douchebag way.

It seems like a few people have determined to support one side or the other, pro reg or anti, and they stick to it no matter what happens.

Cap used a handshake as a means to plant an armor-baffling device on Iron Man. once Tony's armor was locked up, he started beating on him. i'd count this as a deuchebag moment. in other words, deuchebaggery cancels out deuchebaggery. what you're left with is that Iron Man's an officer of law enforcement and Captain America is a baby-eating scoff-law. agree or strongly agree?

Nomad

09-11-2006, 07:01 PM

KrymynalChylde

09-12-2006, 01:39 AM

Cap, a baby? Take it back, RIGHT NOW. If cap is a baby, he's cute little baby luke skywalker, and Iron Man is darth vader, (the ugly one with the cool suit)

The ugly one with the cool suit who gets WAY more pussy then cutie pie Skywalker Rogers!

Nomad

09-12-2006, 01:45 AM

The ugly one with the cool suit who gets WAY more pussy then cutie pie Skywalker Rogers!

Yeah, but it took BOTH of them to bring balance to the force

Brady

09-12-2006, 04:49 AM

Ghost Writer

09-18-2006, 08:39 AM

Cap used a handshake as a means to plant an armor-baffling device on Iron Man. once Tony's armor was locked up, he started beating on him. i'd count this as a deuchebag moment. in other words, deuchebaggery cancels out deuchebaggery. what you're left with is that Iron Man's an officer of law enforcement and Captain America is a baby-eating scoff-law. agree or strongly agree? Strongly disagree!

I voted yes on this poll even though I am all for cap and the anti-reg crusade.

My reasoning and from both Cap and Im's pov:

Cap: Here is a man who is a hero, but also a soldier with real war experience. He had just been ambushed by someone whom he considered a friend, and watched two of his young recruits get felled in the process. Ironman supposedly only wants five minutes to explain his plan. The two panels illustrating Cap looking at Ironman and then towards the shield units before tricking Ironman with that device sums it up for me. Cap's so called friend wanted to talk indeed, but on HIS terms and at gunpoint so to speak, and in the middle of a war mind you. These being the circumstances as evidenced by Cap looking around before incapacitating Iron man, he did what he needed to gain leverage in a war that he clearly could not win any other way. HE IS AT WAR!

Iron Man: Captain A is a symbol in all senses of the word. He is the one biggest threat to the SHRA campaign. What he has represented throughout the years goes beyond heroism. He has reached Iconic status and can definitely sway many to the AR side of the war. Again, he is a symbol. As such, Iron Man should not only have pummeled him, but killed him then and there (irregardless of his morals or his feelings towards cap). If Iron man truly stands behind his beliefs and thinks that he is right, then he needs to destroy the symbol, the face of his opposition, and do so in a venue where the shock of it can be driven home to those who may support Cap and his Secret Avengers.

I'm of the opinion that both Cap and Iron man acted in manners conducive to the situation at hand. I think the writers handled that particular aspect of the story very well.

Again, I am Anti-reg in this event, and seriously pro Cap A right now.

Bobster777

09-19-2006, 06:18 PM

Well, the thing is at heart the registration really isn't that bad an idea. Take away SHIELD, take away the negatize zone prison, take away the issue of unregistered combatants losing their rights, and you have a reasonable idea.

If Tony had made the rest of the superhero community aware of the problem, they could have ALL spent the previous months discussing this openly out in the public before Stamford ever took place. Had Cap and the superhero community as a whole been a part of the process right from the start, perhaps it could have been something a bit more reasonable.

As it stand now, there are too many things wrong with the registration for it NOT to be fought. Ideally that fight should have taken place before it became a law but that didn't happen. Now they are in a position where an unjust law needs to be either accepted or fought. Maybe Caps actions are ultimately futile and meaningless... we'll have to wait and see how it turns out.

But Tony for whatever reason kept it quit except with other members of the Illuminati. He did go to Washington, but again had he discussed the issue with Cap and the others and allowed them to work with him on this perhaps things might have ended up differently.
Well, I think the Illuminati incident proved just why Tony shouldn't have told everyone about it. You had a small group of people debating the issue and no one would even consider the law. I agree with you about one thing. Tony should have told Cap about the law. I don't think that would have changed anything though. I just wish Marvel had the guts to keep the original intention of the law and make it voluntary rather than mandatory.