SECRET INVASION #1 - Review, Discussion, and Spoilers

[TotalWorldDomination]

I don't think Dumdum, Jarvis, and Hank are all his friends... but these days I'd say they were his closest confidants yeah.

As for his treatment of his friends... in She-Hulks case, she sleeps with her while she's trying to find Hulk, who he launched into space before depowering her.

I agree with you on She-Hulk, but then again she did attack him (or at least I belive she did). Still, it was a jerky thing to do not to try and reason with her first.


Peter was obviusly pretty close to Tony. So what does Tony do? He gives Peter this speech about how he's going to indefinately imprison the unregistered combatants... then attacks Peter before he actually even does anything about it.

Once again, Tom Brevehort has said that that speech and those actions slipped out as an editorial accident. Tony was correct in the actual civil war series when he said the imprisonments were temporary.

Also, lets point out that peter was about to stab tony in the back, after swearing that he would stand by him to the bitter end. They had become very close and Tony was understandably upset about it.


In Thor case, aside from the clone Tony basially threatens Thor and tells him that if he doesn't register, he's an enemy of the US.

Umm... that's the whole point of the registration act. Friend or no, that's what his ideals and the law state. If I was a cop and a friend broke the law I'd give them the chance to fix it first... like tony did by asking thor to register.


Though I'm not sure how close they are, I also think he's being a bit of a jerk in the way he's handling Carol's positon as leader of the MA.

He's a micro-manager, but he's trying to let her lead. He followed her lead during the Ultron Arc (untill he... you know... became a robot woman). And in most other incidents with the MA's his position as Director of SHIELD is coming into play.


Tony suppossedly believes Dr. Banner is his friend. If he were, he would have to Tony about willingly exiling himself rather than trying to trick Hulk into it. He reasons for not doing it are simply that he was afraid Bruce would say no... weak. A real friend would have tried talking to Bruce first before doing what he did.

Unfortunatly when dealing with the hulk you can't risk it. The concept may make banner angry... thus making everyone in the immediate area dead.


In regards to Cap... I think both sides acted wrongly there. That said, I think a good 70% of their issues could have been resolved if he had decided to sit down and talk to Cap about this BEFORE Stamford like he did with the Illuminati.

I agree. Rather then go off and start forming an armed resistance, he should have sought tony out. As it was tony's the first one to try and talk, and Cap's response was to punch him. They should have sat down beforehand (and we did see what would have happened if they did sit down and talk in that What If).

[XPac]

Agreed. If Tony's actions were manipulated in large part by the skrulls during CW then he's going to be pretty damned distraught. However, beliving that only one side was manipulated during the CW is a bit foolish. The skrulls were interested in prolonged conflict, meaning that both sides had to be both helped and hurt. I have a feeling that everyone is going to come out of this one with egg on there face. And if everyone admits they were wrong, I'd wager that's the first step on the path towards a compromise.

I think manipulaing Caps side is easy. Just give Caps side a reason to fight. Shoot at Cap, and he'll fight back. Attept to lock up minors in 42, and Caps side will attempt to free them. I'd like to blame the skrulls on the big prison break at the end... but that one is really Tony's fault for the speech he gave Peter (unless of course Tony is a skrull).

To prolong the conflict, it's just a matter of making government as corrupt as possible so Caps side would fight harder. Caps initial plan was to just go around capturing villains. The skrulls didn't need to directly pull their strings like they did Tony.

[Mark_S]

I think manipulaing Caps side is easy. Just give Caps side a reason to fight. Shoot at Cap, and he'll fight back. Attept to lock up minors in 42, and Caps side will attempt to free them. I'd like to blame the skrulls on the big prison break at the end... but that one is really Tony's fault for the speech he gave Peter (unless of course Tony is a skrull).

To prolong the conflict, it's just a matter of making government as corrupt as possible so Caps side would fight harder. Caps initial plan was to just go around capturing villains. The skrulls didn't need to directly pull their strings like they did Tony.

No, but I agree that idea that Cap had no skrulls on his team doesn't really ring true, if only for intelligence reasons. If the skrulls wanted to use cw to really drive a wegde then they'd want to manipulate both sides.

About Thor and Tony's meeting though, I think that the very fact that Tony went to a god and tried to dictate terms shows how high his arogance level is.

About Tony's speach to Peter... editorial mistake or not it was in the book. they want it out they'll have to retcon it somehow, but simply telling us in a blog or an interview isn't going to do it. And I'm amazed that such a mistake was allowed to happen in their premier event. I'd sooner believe that once the public reaction to the speach got back to them they quickly said 'Well it was a mistake.'

Mark_S

[Sean Whitmore]

About Tony's speach to Peter... editorial mistake or not it was in the book. they want it out they'll have to retcon it somehow, but simply telling us in a blog or an interview isn't going to do it.

Sure it is.

Thanks to the amazing power that we, as adults, have to realize such mistakes happen in a shared universe written by different people and therefore ignore them.


SEAN

[XPac]

I agree with you on She-Hulk, but then again she did attack him (or at least I belive she did). Still, it was a jerky thing to do not to try and reason with her first.



Once again, Tom Brevehort has said that that speech and those actions slipped out as an editorial accident. Tony was correct in the actual civil war series when he said the imprisonments were temporary.

Also, lets point out that peter was about to stab tony in the back, after swearing that he would stand by him to the bitter end. They had become very close and Tony was understandably upset about it.



Umm... that's the whole point of the registration act. Friend or no, that's what his ideals and the law state. If I was a cop and a friend broke the law I'd give them the chance to fix it first... like tony did by asking thor to register.



He's a micro-manager, but he's trying to let her lead. He followed her lead during the Ultron Arc (untill he... you know... became a robot woman). And in most other incidents with the MA's his position as Director of SHIELD is coming into play.



Unfortunatly when dealing with the hulk you can't risk it. The concept may make banner angry... thus making everyone in the immediate area dead.



I agree. Rather then go off and start forming an armed resistance, he should have sought tony out. As it was tony's the first one to try and talk, and Cap's response was to punch him. They should have sat down beforehand (and we did see what would have happened if they did sit down and talk in that What If).

In regards to Peter... I'm not saying that the prison wasn't temporary. What I'm saying is that he lied to Peter (which is actually the notion Breevort presented), then attacked him. Yes, Peter was about to stab Tony in the back... but that was after Tony flat out told Peter to his face that he was going to hold the other heroes in jail permanently. Seriously... what did Tony expect Peter to do after that? If you don't want someone stabbing you in the back, don't lie to them about how horribly you're treating people and don't attack them for no actual reason. I think arguing that Tony wasn't a good friend here is pretty clear.

And as for Thor... compare what Tony said to Nova to what he said to Thor (the person who is suppossedly one of his closest friends). With Thor, he flat out threatens him. And he didn't just tell him he needed to register... he actually told Thor that he needed to WORK for the government or he would be an enemy of the US. So he wasn't just enforcing the law... he was flat out drafting him at gun point. Again, I would argue he's not being a good friend there.

As far as Carol goes... he never underminded Cap or Wasp the way he does Carol. Really the only Avengers leader he micro managed this way aside from Carol is Scarlet Witch in Force Works. Beyond that, Tony was always a good team player. So again I'll say, if there's any real friendship between the two I would argue his treatment over her is really undermining it.

I won't argue Banner too much because frankly I think him saying over and over again that him and Bruce are friends is pure BS. But that said, I do think the more ethical way to handle it would be to discuss the issue with Bruce first. It's managable with Dr. Strange there.

As for Cap punching Tony... that was after Tony already deceived Cap and shot at his men (Cap flat out said that's why he did what he did). When Tony just shows up to talk, Cap will talk. Which again is what Tony should have done before this all started in the first place.

[XPac]

Sure it is.

Thanks to the amazing power that we, as adults, have to realize such mistakes happen in a shared universe written by different people.


SEAN

Maybe, but nonetheless if it occurs in a book it's still cannon until it's retconned.

Breevort never said that the Amazing issue never happened. He simply said that Tony may have lied to Peter. And that technically doesn't retcon anything.

[TotalWorldDomination]

About Thor and Tony's meeting though, I think that the very fact that Tony went to a god and tried to dictate terms shows how high his arogance level is.

So are we just supposed to do whatever Thor says because he's a god? Let him do whatever he wants because he's a god? Democracy > gods. Be they Norse, Greek, Irish or even Judeo-Christian. To believe otherwise is theocracy.


Sure it is.

Thanks to the amazing power that we, as adults, have to realize such mistakes happen in a shared universe written by different people.


SEAN

DING DING DING! WE HAVE A WINNER!

(On an aside when is Civil Crisis part 2 going to be up?)


In regards to Peter... I'm not saying that the prison wasn't temporary. What I'm saying is that he lied to Peter (which is actually the notion Breevort presented), then attacked him. Yes, Peter was about to stab Tony in the back... but that was after Tony flat out told Peter to his face that he was going to hold the other heroes in jail permanently. Seriously... what did Tony expect Peter to do after that? If you don't want someone stabbing you in the back, don't lie to them about how horribly you're treating people and don't attack them for no actual reason. I think arguing that Tony wasn't a good friend here is pretty clear.

And as for Thor... compare what Tony said to Nova to what he said to Thor (the person who is suppossedly one of his closest friends). With Thor, he flat out threatens him. And he didn't just tell him he needed to register... he actually told Thor that he needed to WORK for the government or he would be an enemy of the US. So he wasn't just enforcing the law... he was flat out drafting him at gun point. Again, I would argue he's not being a good friend there.

As far as Carol goes... he never underminded Cap or Wasp the way he does Carol. Really the only Avengers leader he micro managed this way aside from Carol is Scarlet Witch in Force Works. Beyond that, Tony was always a good team player. So again I'll say, if there's any real friendship between the two I would argue his treatment over her is really undermining it.

I won't argue Banner too much because frankly I think him saying over and over again that him and Bruce are friends is pure BS. But that said, I do think the more ethical way to handle it would be to discuss the issue with Bruce first. It's managable with Dr. Strange there.

As for Cap punching Tony... that was after Tony already deceived Cap and shot at his men (Cap flat out said that's why he did what he did). When Tony just shows up to talk, Cap will talk. Which again is what Tony should have done before this all started in the first place.

Most of these things occur because of writers personal interpretation of characters. In Nova, Tony is presented as rational. In anything written by JMS post-Stamford he's written like a psychotic. There's a reason that Marvel had to go to the extraordinary lengths of saying that a book was portraying a character incorrectly. JMS clearly dose everyone a disservice when he writes about registration issues.

As for carol... When has he seriously undermined her. They've been on 2 missions, one of which were he was out of action for the whole thing, and another where he was out of action for most of it. The only time he actually overruled her was picking the team, something he said they'd do together.

With Banner and Cap... we're just going to end up repeating the same arguments again. I'll point out that Strange has tried that before and failed, you'll counter. I'll say Cap would have ported out instantly, removing ANY chance for reaching a compromise and that tony only used tranquillizers, you'll counter. We'll have to agree to disagree.

[Sean Whitmore]

Maybe, but nonetheless if it occurs in a book it's still cannon until it's retconned.

Or until everyone just decides to ignore it.

Just ask the Hulk Board if Captain America and Spider-Man ever knocked out the Hulk with their bare fists, and see if they think it's canon. ;)


SEAN

[mikekerr3]

I agree with you on She-Hulk, but then again she did attack him (or at least I belive she did). Still, it was a jerky thing to do not to try and reason with her first.


Jerky was about right. Sleeping with a subordinate is normally considerd a crime in the military, and a firing offense in the police



Once again, Tom Brevehort has said that that speech and those actions slipped out as an editorial accident. Tony was correct in the actual civil war series when he said the imprisonments were temporary.

Also, lets point out that peter was about to stab tony in the back, after swearing that he would stand by him to the bitter end. They had become very close and Tony was understandably upset about it.

I don't believe it was an accident, it was necessary to set up OMD and as sloppily done as the rest of OMD/BND. Stark was just another character trashed in that mess. They could fix in in canon but that would require a whole bubble. Until It is fixed in Canon or a reason for Stark to lie to Peter is shown. I will assume that what he said was Starks original plan that was changed when Peter blew the whistle. Tony could have just told him he was testing him and that he had passed the test.

How was Peter betraying Tony? Tony had just confessed to on-going crimes. Was Peter supposed to help him in those crimes. whether the speech was a lie or not, a moral person would have had no other choice but than try to stop the crimes that Stark had just confessed to. To the Bitter end usually doesn't extend that far into immoral behavior.




Umm... that's the whole point of the registration act. Friend or no, that's what his ideals and the law state. If I was a cop and a friend broke the law I'd give them the chance to fix it first... like tony did by asking thor to register.

Thats what Peter did, had a friend who was breaking many laws and turned him in. Not going to the friend first could be justified in his case because his freind had just confessed to being absolutely ruthless and a major criminal







Unfortunatly when dealing with the hulk you can't risk it. The concept may make banner angry... thus making everyone in the immediate area dead.


Talk to him in orbit of in the middle of the ocean, both would be easy enough for Stark




I agree. Rather then go off and start forming an armed resistance, he should have sought tony out. As it was tony's the first one to try and talk, and Cap's response was to punch him. They should have sat down beforehand (and we did see what would have happened if they did sit down and talk in that What If).

What had they really to talk about? Caps ethics and morals wouldn't let him join Tony. Would the SHRA have changed? Would Tony have considered Joining Cap? Cap wasn't about start hunting his friends, so they had little to discuss. Like most Wars the talking is meaningless after the first violence.

Maria hill started the war and neither man was going to change sides. Also the trap at the factory was not an attempt tpo talk, after you start shooting words are meaningless, two of caps comrades were already down when Tony wanted to talk.

[Sean Whitmore]

This is a great Secret Invasion discussion we're all having.


SEAN

[XPac]

Most of these things occur because of writers personal interpretation of characters. In Nova, Tony is presented as rational. In anything written by JMS post-Stamford he's written like a psychotic. There's a reason that Marvel had to go to the extraordinary lengths of saying that a book was portraying a character incorrectly. JMS clearly dose everyone a disservice when he writes about registration issues.

As for carol... When has he seriously undermined her. They've been on 2 missions, one of which were he was out of action for the whole thing, and another where he was out of action for most of it. The only time he actually overruled her was picking the team, something he said they'd do together.

With Banner and Cap... we're just going to end up repeating the same arguments again. I'll point out that Strange has tried that before and failed, you'll counter. I'll say Cap would have ported out instantly, removing ANY chance for reaching a compromise and that tony only used tranquillizers, you'll counter. We'll have to agree to disagree.

You can knock the writing if you want ... the point is that it was in cannon. It happened in the books. And I don't agree that ignoring something simply because you personally feel it wasn't written well makes for a good objective arguement in any sort of discusion here. I think a good percentage of the comics I read in the 90's were badly written... doesn't mean I pretend it didn't happen.

As for Carol... I think Tony underminding Carols authority is a frankly obvious plot point in the story. I'd be genuinely suprised if you don't see it. Tony himself had to remind himself that Carol as in charge in their very first mission, so it's not something I think Bendis is being particuarly subtle about. Is it a huge deal? No. But he's unecessarily undermining Carols confidence and whatever relationship they may have together. And he either doesn't see it, or simply doesn't give a dam. But I'm not sure they're that close anyways, so whatever.

In regards to Cap (and for the record you were the one that brought up the Clor fight, I was referring to them talking BEFORE CW)... of course he'd teleport away. This was a trap afterall. I'm merely saying that Tony can talk to Cap when that's all he wants to do. Cap was willing to talk to him at the baseball stadium and at Avengers mansion.

As for Bruce... again, I don't really feel I need to discuss this too much since I believe Tony saying over and over again that he was Bruce's friend was just PR. But I'll say again... the ethical legal way to handle it would be to talk to Bruce first. It might not work (not like Tonys way worked either), but that would be the right thing to do. We both seem to agree that heroes talking might have made CW turn out better... all I am arging is perhaps the same could be said about WWH. Perhaps. If indeed they had no other options I'm not sure why it's not at least worth a try.

[TotalWorldDomination]

This is a great Secret Invasion discussion we're all having.


SEAN

Umm... yeah. Secret Invasion! Skrulls and Stuff! Umm... Spider Woman is... uhh... she... Oh who are we kidding. We're never going to get over civil war. Next issue of Secret Invasion we'll start out talking about it and then it'll collapse from there. It's hopeless.

[XPac]

Or until everyone just decides to ignore it.

Just ask the Hulk Board if Captain America and Spider-Man ever knocked out the Hulk with their bare fists, and see if they think it's canon. ;)


SEAN

Considering the amount of discussion it's still getting years later, I think it's fair to argue that it's not being ignored.

[Mark_S]

So are we just supposed to do whatever Thor says because he's a god? Let him do whatever he wants because he's a god? Democracy > gods. Be they Norse, Greek, Irish or even Judeo-Christian. To believe otherwise is theocracy.


No, there was nothing said about obeying gods. In fact in the entire time I've been reading comics has Thor ever gave Tony and order from god to mortal? I might have missed one though, so I really can't say. But Tony knows that Thor is a god. Think about that, a mortal was about to dictate to a god what he could and could not do, and threaten him if he did not do it. Not Avenger to Avenger, but mortal to god.
If it has come to the point that Man now controls the actions of Gods then we really don't have to worry about much do we? The skrulls won't even be a problem. By his actions Tony proved that we aren't there yet, and he proved even more his arogance in thinking that he was Thor's equal. To a certain point I can see why. Tony controls great power, he created life in the Clor project, his empire is vast and people obey him, who was a god to trouble him? What was the difference between himself and a god?
He was going to tell Thor what was going on and Thor was going to accept that and follow orders. When that didn't happen Tony attacked. It can be argued that Thor hit first, but that's as much of a stretch as saying that She-Hulk attacked first because she was walking toward Tony and clearly angry. None of the lightning bolts that was flaring around Thor hit Tony. But in both cases Tony struck first at a slight provocation and expected the opponent to fold.
Tony went in expecting to win a fight and he lost. If he had won I'd be worried if I were living in the mu. Tony can barely handle the power he has, beating a god would have made him even more arogant.

Mark_S

[Sean Whitmore]

Considering the amount of discussion it's still getting years later, I think it's fair to argue that it's not being ignored.

Ah, hell. That's what I get for using the Hulk Board as an example of rationality.


SEAN

[XPac]

Umm... yeah. Secret Invasion! Skrulls and Stuff! Umm... Spider Woman is... uhh... she... Oh who are we kidding. We're never going to get over civil war. Next issue of Secret Invasion we'll start out talking about it and then it'll collapse from there. It's hopeless.

Secret Invasion might actually help people get over Civil War if we can dump enough of the blame on the skrulls.

[Will.S]

This is a great Secret Invasion discussion we're all having.


SEAN
So you're noticing it too eh Sean?

:wink:

[mikekerr3]

Secret Invasion might actually help people get over Civil War if we can dump enough of the blame on the skrulls.


Does anybody working for Marvel have that much skill?

I don't think it will fix anything much as too many people at Marvel don't see what the problem is with Tony and the SHRA. I don't think they want it over with or Tony would not have tried to arrest Cage in the middle of a crisis. Tony can morally goof at times up but it takes effort to make him that incredibly stupid.

The only place where he is traditionaly stupid in the books is he hasn't figured out that some systems should not be networked and hackable and I think that is an ego thing. Have the suit programing burned into ROM and nobody can hack it.

[XPac]

Does anybody working for Marvel have that much skill?

I don't think it will fix anything much as too many people at Marvel don't see what the problem is with Tony and the SHRA. I don't think they want it over with or Tony would not have tried to arrest Cage in the middle of a crisis. Tony can morally goof at times up but it takes effort to make him that incredibly stupid.

The only place where he is traditionaly stupid in the books is he hasn't figured out that some systems should not be networked and hackable and I think that is an ego thing. Have the suit programing burned into ROM and nobody can hack it.

I don't think they want the SHRA over yet either... but if skrulls are behind at least some of it, then it simplifies at least SOME of the debate. I think we call ALL agree that skrull plots are wrong.

[mikekerr3]

I don't think they want the SHRA over yet either... but if skrulls are behind at least some of it, then it simplifies at least SOME of the debate. I think we call ALL agree that skrull plots are wrong.

Probably so.

[jackolover]

That is what I truly think that the Skrull were doing in Civil War, trying to influence the darker parts in Tony's mind. :frown:


That is such a hard thing to prove. There are so many books and tie-in in CW that Tonys character flips around so many times, that you couldn't pin him down to anything. One moment he is sensible Tony, and the next, he is Stone Cold Tony.

There was no evidence of a Dr Faustus character influencing Tony Stark during CW.

[jackolover]

It is pretty funny that arguably his closest friends these days all seem to be skrulls.

Though I guess that's not shocking considering the way he's treated a lot of his human friends (Cap, Spidey, Thor, SheHulk, etc).

He did lose Happy and the professor, and later, Maya, so Tony has had all his close friends taken away from him, but I doubt it was Skrull related.

[Dr. Chaos]

Other than helping the SHRA push through legistration among a couple of other things (theres no way in hell skrulls aren't all over the Marvel US government), I don't see a big skrull revelation for Civil War.

Obviously though, at the end of the day what happened in Civil War will still be people like Iron Man, Pym (assuming Skrull Pym didn't program Clor to kill the heroes, which would be kind of interesting) and SHIELD's fault.

[XPac]

Other than helping the SHRA push through legistration among a couple of other things (theres no way in hell skrulls aren't all over the Marvel US government), I don't see a big skrull revelation for Civil War.

Obviously though, at the end of the day what happened in Civil War will still be people like Iron Man, Pym (assuming Skrull Pym didn't program Clor to kill the heroes, which would be kind of interesting) and SHIELD's fault.

Though the skrulls can't be completely credited for Civil War (Tony saw it coming long before any skrulliness was on the radar), there are a few key roles the skrulls could have played.

Nitro was powered up by someone... that could be Skrull related. Or perhaps some of the New Warriors at the time were skrulls. Maybe Namorita for example. It wouldn't be impossible for the skrulls to indirectly cause Stamford to occur.

If Hill is a skrull, we can place a good deal of fault on her as her attack on Captain America really got the ball rolling. Miriam Sharpe likewise is a potential candidate as far as whispering in Tony's ear the whole time.

As mentioned, a Hank Skrull could have played a role in Clor going nuts (though that doesn't completely get Tony and Reed off the hook there).

[Dr. Chaos]

Nitro was powered up by someone... that could be Skrull related.
Wasn't there something about a mutant hormone drug?

I believe there was a Wolverine tie-in about it.


If Hill is a skrull, we can place a good deal of fault on her as her attack on Captain America really got the ball rolling. Miriam Sharpe likewise is a potential candidate as far as whispering in Tony's ear the whole time.
Didn't mention it but yes, I definitely expect Nick to come back and see SHIELD alot greener than he remembers.

I do hope Secret Invasion helps connect some of the dots to some of SHIELD's more ridiculous actions in recent years, such as slavery.

[kraiden]

Emma Frost (no shes a villan in the 70's)
Spider-Man (definitely no)
Beast (no not with the whole 2ndary mutation and messiah complex stuff)
Luke Cage (cant make him the main marvel charachter then mess it up)
Classic Thor (totally cant dupe a god)
70s Wonder Man (would be cool and explain why he would stay a hero)
Invisible Woman (confirmed in this issue not to be the case)
Jean Grey (HAHAH yeah right)
Hawkeye (not at all)
Iron Man (definitely no)
Vision (cant dupe a robot)
Scarlet Witch (no more mutants?)
Mockingbird (YES!!)
Jewel (no she had a kid)
Captain America (would have been a large 2 page layout if it was him back)
Ms. Marvel (definitely no; already confirmed not to be but wish she was)
Wolverine (nope)

[jackolover]

About Thor and Tony's meeting though, I think that the very fact that Tony went to a god and tried to dictate terms shows how high his arogance level is.

Mark_S

What has bothered me all along with the Clor case, is that Tony never respected Thor as a god. Tony kept Thors hair because he wanted to check whether Thor was a God. I wonder what his conclusions were? Considering Thor #3, I'd say Tony still disagrees that Thor is a god, and treats him like a human nut.

[XPac]

What has bothered me all along with the Clor case, is that Tony never respected Thor as a god. Tony kept Thors hair because he wanted to check whether Thor was a God. I wonder what his conclusions were? Considering Thor #3, I'd say Tony still disagrees that Thor is a god, and treats him like a human nut.

Well, he certainly ended up treating Thor like a god (or pretty dam close at least) once Thor got through with him.

Perhaps had Thor beat the snot out of him sooner, there would have been less confusion on the issue.

Still, as I said earlier, I didn't need Tony to treat Thor like a god... I just wanted to see Tony treat him like a friend.

[jackolover]

And as for Thor... compare what Tony said to Nova to what he said to Thor (the person who is suppossedly one of his closest friends). With Thor, he flat out threatens him. And he didn't just tell him he needed to register... he actually told Thor that he needed to WORK for the government or he would be an enemy of the US. So he wasn't just enforcing the law... he was flat out drafting him at gun point. Again, I would argue he's not being a good friend there.



If Tony, in fact doesn't trust that the guy who showed up in Colorado is his old mate Thor, then Tony won't let his encounter end in Thor #3. Conversely, Thor must now realize that the relationship between himself and Tony Stark was never as trustful as he assumed. I suspect Thor will never join any Avengers that contains Tony Stark, because Tony created an abomination from Thors DNA, and, had lost respect by approaching Thor like a common criminal.

Thor addressed some of this in his threat to the White House, and his statement that this has not been resolved. I want to be there when Tony tells Thor to his face that the Thunder God is nothing more than a deluded freak show.

[Sean Whitmore]

Perhaps had Thor beat the snot out of him sooner, there would have been less confusion on the issue.

If Tony was that easily swayed, he'd be thinking the Mandarin was a god.


SEAN

[jackolover]

So are we just supposed to do whatever Thor says because he's a god? Let him do whatever he wants because he's a god? Democracy > gods. Be they Norse, Greek, Irish or even Judeo-Christian. To believe otherwise is theocracy.



This is the same issue with Thor and with Namor.

In both cases, the authority of a country (USA) is trying to enforce it's law over the sovereignty of 2 other states. I hope someone addresses this confrontation one day, because using a nations own laws to override another countries own laws is something I want to see.

We've seen Thors summary reaction to Starks first approaches in this direction, and with Namor, he would rather see his kingdom wiped away than let Starks law come anywhere near Atlantis. When that day comes, I think the real morality of the SHRA will be layed open for it's arrogance and high mindedness. Nobody can take the high moral ground over the wishes of another people.

[mikekerr3]

If Tony, in fact doesn't trust that the guy who showed up in Colorado is his old mate Thor, then Tony won't let his encounter end in Thor #3. Conversely, Thor must now realize that the relationship between himself and Tony Stark was never as trustful as he assumed. I suspect Thor will never join any Avengers that contains Tony Stark, because Tony created an abomination from Thors DNA, and, had lost respect by approaching Thor like a common criminal.

Thor addressed some of this in his threat to the White House, and his statement that this has not been resolved. I want to be there when Tony tells Thor to his face that the Thunder God is nothing more than a deluded freak show.

I think thier wont be a next time that Tony tries to talk trash to Thor. Iron Man would be to valuable a property if Thor didn't Show mercy the second time.

Tony was incredibly stupid to talk to Thor that way. He doesn't have to worship him but that much power deserves respect. I don't worship hurricanes but I don't try to take one on either. With only one of the Avengers even being able to do more than annoy Thor even as a group. I think Tony won't be trying to push Thor into registering again.

Bob has shown enough good sense, I don't think he would risk destroying a good portion of the US just to have Thor register.

Anyway I think that The Sentry will be the saving grace in th SI, he's the only one that they can be sure is not a Skrull. If they can copy him it would be better to learn to speak Skrull.

[jackolover]

How was Peter betraying Tony? Tony had just confessed to on-going crimes. Was Peter supposed to help him in those crimes. whether the speech was a lie or not, a moral person would have had no other choice but than try to stop the crimes that Stark had just confessed to. To the Bitter end usually doesn't extend that far into immoral behavior.

I liked JMS portrayal of how Tony and Peter co-related in the Negative Zone. It had real tension, and it caused the defection.

What hasn't been addressed, of course, is should Peter have betrayed his boss. I am thinking Tony deliberately baited Peter, to see if Tony would crack Peters blood oath. Then when Tony saw that he could, Tony regretted the baited, and wanted to keep Peter in his team. That was dramatic storytelling.

Was Peter free to defect under a blood oath? There. Thats the cruncher isn't it. Never make an oath with anyone. Never. Because you will live to regret it. As soon as I read Peter giving his word to Tony, I knew this was a dangerous thing.

How much do you stick to the friend you give your oath too? Through thick and thin? Through compromises to your very moral constitution? Depends on how much you both agree to the course you both set out upon. If Peter had committed to the pro-reg side, he wouldn't have minded what they did to arrestees.

[jackolover]

This is a great Secret Invasion discussion we're all having.


SEAN

Isn't it, but.

......Oh wait a minute. You're being sarcastic, aren't you? Why can't we have our little CW rant now and then?

[Sean Whitmore]

Isn't it, but.

......Oh wait a minute. You're being sarcastic, aren't you? Why can't we have our little CW rant now and then?

I'm all for it. I'll even start the thread myself. :)


SEAN

[mikekerr3]

I liked JMS portrayal of how Tony and Peter co-related in the Negative Zone. It had real tension, and it caused the defection.

What hasn't been addressed, of course, is should Peter have betrayed his boss. I am thinking Tony deliberately baited Peter, to see if Tony would crack Peters blood oath. Then when Tony saw that he could, Tony regretted the baited, and wanted to keep Peter in his team. That was dramatic storytelling.

Was Peter free to defect under a blood oath? There. Thats the cruncher isn't it. Never make an oath with anyone. Never. Because you will live to regret it. As soon as I read Peter giving his word to Tony, I knew this was a dangerous thing.

How much do you stick to the friend you give your oath too? Through thick and thin? Through compromises to your very moral constitution? Depends on how much you both agree to the course you both set out upon. If Peter had committed to the pro-reg side, he wouldn't have minded what they did to arrestees.

An other of loyalty should not be like Omerta. Do you think that loyalty to your friends extends to helping them commit serious crimes. Peter morals left him without any choice than to leave.

Does being Pro-reg mean that Peter has to ignore basic human rights and dignity to support what ever evil Stark is doing to the Anti-regs.

I have taken an oath a few times to obey the orders of those appointed over me, does that mean that I could be ordered to commit crimes? Murder, Treason, Rape?.

Peter gave his oath to what he thought was a hero, what he said in 42 were the words of a villain.

[jackolover]

An other of loyalty should not be like Omerta. Do you think that loyalty to your friends extends to helping them commit serious crimes. Peter morals left him without any choice than to leave.

Does being Pro-reg mean that Peter has to ignore basic human rights and dignity to support what ever evil Stark is doing to the Anti-regs.

I have taken an oath a few times to obey the orders of those appointed over me, does that mean that I could be ordered to commit crimes? Murder, Treason, Rape?.

Peter gave his oath to what he thought was a hero, what he said in 42 were the words of a villain.

But just say a group of you agreed that you had to be vigilantes, in the case when family members were attacked, and the culprit known, but there was no lawful proof. You all agree to wreak vengence, no matter how it turns out; whether successful, or getting caught, and even killed yourselves. Under such an oath, everyone knows what can happen and you take that risk when you go after the culprit. Then someone gets hurt, and culprit gets away and you are all arrested. Do you all rat on each other, or hold your mouths shut and take your punishment? That's the kind of commitment I'm suggesting was required in CW. Peter whimped when the going got tough, while Reed, Hank, and Jan stuck to the task.

[Mark_S]

Umm... yeah. Secret Invasion! Skrulls and Stuff! Umm... Spider Woman is... uhh... she... Oh who are we kidding. We're never going to get over civil war. Next issue of Secret Invasion we'll start out talking about it and then it'll collapse from there. It's hopeless.

Well we've only got one SI issue and we've got tons of cw stuff that is tying directly into SI, as we get more SI issues the cw talk will most likely fade a bit, unless cw is more essential to SI than we think.

Mark_S

[Venom Melendez]

Anyone else notice that the guard says Armadillo is trapped on the Raft but Armadillo is a member of the Texas Rangers?


Armadillo was Kicked out from the Rangers then he joined MODOK's 11 and then he Joined The Hood's gang.

[mikekerr3]

But just say a group of you agreed that you had to be vigilantes, in the case when family members were attacked, and the culprit known, but there was no lawful proof. You all agree to wreak vengence, no matter how it turns out; whether successful, or getting caught, and even killed yourselves. Under such an oath, everyone knows what can happen and you take that risk when you go after the culprit. Then someone gets hurt, and culprit gets away and you are all arrested. Do you all rat on each other, or hold your mouths shut and take your punishment? That's the kind of commitment I'm suggesting was required in CW. Peter whimped when the going got tough, while Reed, Hank, and Jan stuck to the task.

Peter never agree to become what he as been fighting, never agrees to become a Super-Villian. He Never agrees to become evil. That was what Tony was asking him to be. Helping Tony would be turning his back on everything he believed in and be like p***ing on Uncle Ben's grave.

His oath was to help a hero not a villian.

I will never consider doing the right thing wimping out. A man would have to have no morals of Honor to back Tony after the speach and change with "Great Power Comes Great Responsibly" to "with Great Power comes The Right to Commit Great Crimes"

[Berkey]

Anyway I think that The Sentry will be the saving grace in th SI, he's the only one that they can be sure is not a Skrull. If they can copy him it would be better to learn to speak Skrull.

I hope not, I mean no matter how much they try and pump him the fanbase will always be split on him. I kinda wish he just dies ( I do like the character, but they can't do anything with him unless he becomes a comsic character) or maybe gives a large portion of power up permenatly to save the day. Other than that I can't see how his character can ever be used other than the last option because he should be able to stop anything from the get go.

If Sentry is really as powerful as everyone says he is then there should be no need for heroes all over the place because he could just fly over cough and make the bad men go away. Which is why people are split on his position even Hulk, thor and some cosmics gets theirs Maybe the Living Tribunal will show up and get rid of him, but I'm sure the sentry could take him:rolleyes:

PS not hating on Sentry just the way he has been used and poorly written

[bjtrdff]

I hope not, I mean no matter how much they try and pump him the fanbase will always be split on him. I kinda wish he just dies ( I do like the character, but they can't do anything with him unless he becomes a comsic character) or maybe gives a large portion of power up permenatly to save the day. Other than that I can't see how his character can ever be used other than the last option because he should be able to stop anything from the get go.

If Sentry is really as powerful as everyone says he is then there should be no need for heroes all over the place because he could just fly over cough and make the bad men go away. Which is why people are split on his position even Hulk, thor and some cosmics gets theirs Maybe the Living Tribunal will show up and get rid of him, but I'm sure the sentry could take him:rolleyes:

PS not hating on Sentry just the way he has been used and poorly written



The same can be said for superman or captain marvel. It all depends on the writing, and frankly I think that the way they've gone about limiting the Sentry (mental issues) is a much better way of doing that than what is normally seen with such high powered characters.

I would think the Sentry will have a pretty solid role, but still be caught up in the 'which heroes are my friends' deal. Although if the assembled heroes were smart, someone would scream for no one to move, and for Bob to escort to entire crowd somewhere safe.

Then take off their shirts and kiss.

[XPac]

I liked JMS portrayal of how Tony and Peter co-related in the Negative Zone. It had real tension, and it caused the defection.

What hasn't been addressed, of course, is should Peter have betrayed his boss. I am thinking Tony deliberately baited Peter, to see if Tony would crack Peters blood oath. Then when Tony saw that he could, Tony regretted the baited, and wanted to keep Peter in his team. That was dramatic storytelling.

Was Peter free to defect under a blood oath? There. Thats the cruncher isn't it. Never make an oath with anyone. Never. Because you will live to regret it. As soon as I read Peter giving his word to Tony, I knew this was a dangerous thing.

How much do you stick to the friend you give your oath too? Through thick and thin? Through compromises to your very moral constitution? Depends on how much you both agree to the course you both set out upon. If Peter had committed to the pro-reg side, he wouldn't have minded what they did to arrestees.

Perhaps Tony INTENDED for Peter to betray him. He might have been trying to use Peter to bait a trap at 42.

Peter goes off and tells Cap how the prisoners are being deprived of their rights, Caps team goes off to the prison to free them, and Tony and his his crew are waiting for them. Tony, not being Caps equal as a strategist, of course fails to realize that Cap can think 2 steps ahead and turn that situation to their favor.

[XPac]

But just say a group of you agreed that you had to be vigilantes, in the case when family members were attacked, and the culprit known, but there was no lawful proof. You all agree to wreak vengence, no matter how it turns out; whether successful, or getting caught, and even killed yourselves. Under such an oath, everyone knows what can happen and you take that risk when you go after the culprit. Then someone gets hurt, and culprit gets away and you are all arrested. Do you all rat on each other, or hold your mouths shut and take your punishment? That's the kind of commitment I'm suggesting was required in CW. Peter whimped when the going got tough, while Reed, Hank, and Jan stuck to the task.

I think that's the biggest criticism you can have about the Imperial Guard (specifically Gladiator). He has this oath to serve the emperor of the Shiar... even if the emperor is insane and potentially could bring about the end of the universe. That's not loyalty... that's sheer stupidity.

If you're Peter Parker, you do what you believe is right and you hope everything turns out for the best. The level of blind obedience you're suggesting doesn't in any way resemble true heroism... it's really about following your conscience and doing what you believe is right.

[Van Custo]

The thing that doesn't make sense is the Skrulls plan to take over Earth and they've strategicly attacked all the main points of Earth's defenses and power....except Thor and Asgard. How do you overlook like the biggest one? How do you take Earth over with them still there?

Most likely the explanation will be he returned so recent they never had time to prepare for him. But if he doesn't appear at all in SI that's gonna be really really stupid. Not just cuz I love the character but cuz it makes no sense.

[mikekerr3]

Perhaps Tony INTENDED for Peter to betray him. He might have been trying to use Peter to bait a trap at 42.

Peter goes off and tells Cap how the prisoners are being deprived of their rights, Caps team goes off to the prison to free them, and Tony and his his crew are waiting for them. Tony, not being Caps equal as a strategist, of course fails to realize that Cap can think 2 steps ahead and turn that situation to their favor.

I think it must be a generational thing, I still can't se how exposing major crimes is a betrayal. What Stark was talking about meant that supporting him would be a betrayal of what this country stands for and the rule of law.

[Magneto Rocks]

Whereas of course, running around beating up policemen and refusing to obey the will of the people is neither of those things....

And incidentally, when you make a commitment to someone and then turn on them, you've betrayed them. It doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing, but it is INDISPUTABLE Peter betrayed Tony. I mean, you can say he did it for the greater good or whatever, but it's still a betrayal, no matter how you spin it. I'm not even going to begin to argue on 42 yet again, because that ship has sailed around the world 44 times and then sailed somewhere far into space at this stage. Basically, no-one's going to budge from their position because thanks to the ingenuity (That was sarcasm :tongue:) of Marvel, both sides have things to back their interpretation up. There's an undeniable argument to be made that Tony lied to Peter for bizarre reasons of his own, and an equal argument to be made that the conversation simply didn't happen in the way we were shown, and neither side is any more right than the other. (Well, actually, no, my side is right. But that's back to the "interpretation" thing :wink)

[Beast]

The thing that doesn't make sense is the Skrulls plan to take over Earth and they've strategicly attacked all the main points of Earth's defenses and power....except Thor and Asgard. How do you overlook like the biggest one? How do you take Earth over with them still there?

Most likely the explanation will be he returned so recent they never had time to prepare for him. But if he doesn't appear at all in SI that's gonna be really really stupid. Not just cuz I love the character but cuz it makes no sense.
Check out Incredible Hercules. The Skrull Gods are coming. So they likely do have a plan.

[jackolover]

Peter never agree to become what he as been fighting, never agrees to become a Super-Villian. He Never agrees to become evil. That was what Tony was asking him to be. Helping Tony would be turning his back on everything he believed in and be like p***ing on Uncle Ben's grave.

His oath was to help a hero not a villian.

I will never consider doing the right thing wimping out. A man would have to have no morals of Honor to back Tony after the speech and change with "Great Power Comes Great Responsibly" to "with Great Power comes The Right to Commit Great Crimes"

I just keep remembering how Peter packed his bags, rang about all his bank accounts, so he could leave NY and fend for himself without family and friends, until Aunt May said, 'we don't run away from our responsibilities'. But that's exactly what Peter was going to do. But when May handed him his repaired old suit, this is what made Peter shake on a blood oath with Tony? Give me a break with Peters Honor already. He whimps out and got caught by his old Aunt even before he joins the pro-reg side, so I don't think Pete is any sort of character, at least in the CW, that can be justified in any way.

Peter is a flag, in CW, and flies which way the wind blows. Tony Stark should never have taken him on board in this situation. Peters first instincts were the best, but even he couldn't overcome family ties, and he was the man of the house. He should have had the authority to make the hard decisions, but he comes off like a school boy in CW.



The same can be said for superman or captain marvel. It all depends on the writing, and frankly I think that the way they've gone about limiting the Sentry (mental issues) is a much better way of doing that than what is normally seen with such high powered characters.

I would think the Sentry will have a pretty solid role, but still be caught up in the 'which heroes are my friends' deal.

I think this event is too complicated for Sentry. It's not like the Sentry can just go up to the villain and punch him out. Nobody knows who the villain is.

The best Sentry could do, if it was identified in time, is to destroy the armada just reaching earths atmosphere, but I hazard a guess that the Skrulls already have something planned to keep Sentry occupied, so he doesn't realize where he is needed most.

[jackolover]

I hope not, I mean no matter how much they try and pump him the fanbase will always be split on him. I kinda wish he just dies ( I do like the character, but they can't do anything with him unless he becomes a comsic character) or maybe gives a large portion of power up permenatly to save the day. Other than that I can't see how his character can ever be used other than the last option because he should be able to stop anything from the get go.

If Sentry is really as powerful as everyone says he is then there should be no need for heroes all over the place because he could just fly over cough and make the bad men go away. Which is why people are split on his position even Hulk, thor and some cosmics gets theirs Maybe the Living Tribunal will show up and get rid of him, but I'm sure the sentry could take him:rolleyes:

PS not hating on Sentry just the way he has been used and poorly written

Sentry has fluctuated between cool, general, supremo; in-charge of his emotions, and clarity in analysis, to, this driveling, sack of useless Sh*t, that cries in his wheaties. I wish Sentry would get his game together, and take control, in one of these events. He has the power and organisation of the Nova Corps, yet he wastes his time on planet earth.

[Mark_S]

Sentry has fluctuated between cool, general, supremo; in-charge of his emotions, and clarity in analysis, to, this driveling, sack of useless Sh*t, that cries in his wheaties. I wish Sentry would get his game together, and take control, in one of these events. He has the power and organisation of the Nova Corps, yet he wastes his time on planet earth.

It is possible that having created him the writers at marvel have very little idea of what to do with the character.

Mark_S

[XPac]

Whereas of course, running around beating up policemen and refusing to obey the will of the people is neither of those things....

And incidentally, when you make a commitment to someone and then turn on them, you've betrayed them. It doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing, but it is INDISPUTABLE Peter betrayed Tony. I mean, you can say he did it for the greater good or whatever, but it's still a betrayal, no matter how you spin it. I'm not even going to begin to argue on 42 yet again, because that ship has sailed around the world 44 times and then sailed somewhere far into space at this stage. Basically, no-one's going to budge from their position because thanks to the ingenuity (That was sarcasm :tongue:) of Marvel, both sides have things to back their interpretation up. There's an undeniable argument to be made that Tony lied to Peter for bizarre reasons of his own, and an equal argument to be made that the conversation simply didn't happen in the way we were shown, and neither side is any more right than the other. (Well, actually, no, my side is right. But that's back to the "interpretation" thing :wink)

If you want to be technical, Stark attacked Peter before Peter could actualy do anything, so an arguement can be made that Stark betrayed Peter first. Peter was going to betray Stark... but he didn't actually get around to doing it before Stark jumps him.

[jackolover]

Perhaps Tony INTENDED for Peter to betray him. He might have been trying to use Peter to bait a trap at 42.

Peter goes off and tells Cap how the prisoners are being deprived of their rights, Caps team goes off to the prison to free them, and Tony and his his crew are waiting for them. Tony, not being Caps equal as a strategist, of course fails to realize that Cap can think 2 steps ahead and turn that situation to their favor.

Boy, I never saw that coming. But that is another option I never thought of at the time, but it does fit.

[jackolover]

I think that's the biggest criticism you can have about the Imperial Guard (specifically Gladiator). He has this oath to serve the emperor of the Shiar... even if the emperor is insane and potentially could bring about the end of the universe. That's not loyalty... that's sheer stupidity.

If you're Peter Parker, you do what you believe is right and you hope everything turns out for the best. The level of blind obedience you're suggesting doesn't in any way resemble true heroism... it's really about following your conscience and doing what you believe is right.

And Peter never really had that kind of commitment to stick with Tony and his methods, no matter what. I suppose you could consider that Peter should have had faith in Tony to get to the right place in the end, despite the route that Tony took to get there. Tony, after all, was a hero and Peter should have trusted Tony through thick and thin.

But what you're considering, Xpac, (and Sue and Johnny made this call as well), is that the inner conscience balks at the violence and the seeming betrayal that the whole CW threw at the combatants, and that was what Peter was taping into. Peter was revolted by the brutality, and wouldn't do some things that were intended for the greater good, but which 'looked' unjustifiable.

[jackolover]

The thing that doesn't make sense is the Skrulls plan to take over Earth and they've strategicly attacked all the main points of Earth's defenses and power....except Thor and Asgard. How do you overlook like the biggest one? How do you take Earth over with them still there?

Most likely the explanation will be he returned so recent they never had time to prepare for him. But if he doesn't appear at all in SI that's gonna be really really stupid. Not just cuz I love the character but cuz it makes no sense.

But how does a God, or Gods, cope with a change in government on earth, if they can't pin-point who it is to get rid of?

It all has to play out in a very complicated fashion, now that the Skrulls have manipulated the earth governments with the Skrull sleeper agents. How can the Gods attack, if what they see is a political overthrow?

I think that's whats going to keep Thor out of the game, until the armada becomes a real influence on the ground, and then everyone will have a target, including Thor.

[jackolover]

I think it must be a generational thing, I still can't se how exposing major crimes is a betrayal. What Stark was talking about meant that supporting him would be a betrayal of what this country stands for and the rule of law.

Ya see, the whole structure of that rule of law had changed already. What Tony was doing was against the law, in this SHRA climate, so that logic goes out the window. Peter didn't have to consider the old world rule of law, in this case, and that's what was happening in the CW. There was a change in the rule of law, and none of the heroes could accept that.

[XPac]

And Peter never really had that kind of commitment to stick with Tony and his methods, no matter what. I suppose you could consider that Peter should have had faith in Tony to get to the right place in the end, despite the route that Tony took to get there. Tony, after all, was a hero and Peter should have trusted Tony through thick and thin.

But what you're considering, Xpac, (and Sue and Johnny made this call as well), is that the inner conscience balks at the violence and the seeming betrayal that the whole CW threw at the combatants, and that was what Peter was taping into. Peter was revolted by the brutality, and wouldn't do some things that were intended for the greater good, but which 'looked' unjustifiable.

No, he didn't have enough faith in Tony to stick with his methods no matter what... nor should he.

The reason he had trouble with the fact that Tony was telling him the jails were permanent is because he DID have faith that Tony would do the heroes right in the end. That's why he went along with this. Once Tony revealed (or lied about) the prisons were going to be permanent, he understandably had to re-think his position.

Really was the problem that Peter didn't trust Tony enough, or that Tony didn't trust Peter? Was it really necessary for Stark to create this elaborate lie to Peter? Had he not done that, perhaps Peter might not have changed sides. We'll never know... but either way, I don't think Peter betrayed Tony anymore than Tony ended up betraying him. Tony made the decision to lie to Peter about this in the first place.

Maybe that's why Stark put Carol in charge of the MA. She's having obvious confidence issues, so perhaps he felt she was the perfect choice NOT to second guess him and to go along with him no matter what.

[mikekerr3]

Ya see, the whole structure of that rule of law had changed already. What Tony was doing was against the law, in this SHRA climate, so that logic goes out the window. Peter didn't have to consider the old world rule of law, in this case, and that's what was happening in the CW. There was a change in the rule of law, and none of the heroes could accept that.

Where did you get that the constitution had been amended and ratified by the States? Unless that had happened what Tony was doing was criminal. Repealing the Bill of Rights would have caused many to pick up gums and kill the idiots who did it. Throwing out thing that have been rights since the Magna Carta seems a little extreme/

[CMBMOOL]

Can we please cut the "Peter betray Tony" argument, because thanks to the story that is OMD and BND, that may not have occured in the first place. :mad:

[TradePaperbackTraitor]

All I know is Secret Invasion #1 didn't leave the same foul taste in my mouth that the last big Marvel mini-series (Ultimates 3 #1) did so that's a good start. :biggrin:

(And I was a bit worried with what looks like a decline in Bendis on the Avengers.)

[jackolover]

Where did you get that the constitution had been amended and ratified by the States? Unless that had happened what Tony was doing was criminal. Repealing the Bill of Rights would have caused many to pick up gums and kill the idiots who did it. Throwing out thing that have been rights since the Magna Carta seems a little extreme/

(I must apologize for the spelling error in the second line - 'What Tony was doing wasn't against the law...'. And I should have clarified that it was only the rebels that couldn't accept the change in the rule of Law).

Nevertheless, Laws written like the SHRA have to power to override Bill of Rights, just like the Terrorism changes that have come in the real world. What used to be rights, have now been overridden, so baggage restrictions have intensified, and targeted persons of interest are now commonplace.

The renegades just haven't accepted that they are targeted persons of interest in the SHRA case.

[jackolover]

Can we please cut the "Peter betray Tony" argument, because thanks to the story that is OMD and BND, that may not have occured in the first place. :mad:

This should be over soon.

[Mr. Earl Brooks]

I think this event is too complicated for Sentry. It's not like the Sentry can just go up to the villain and punch him out. Nobody knows who the villain is.

The best Sentry could do, if it was identified in time, is to destroy the armada just reaching earths atmosphere, but I hazard a guess that the Skrulls already have something planned to keep Sentry occupied, so he doesn't realize where he is needed most.

The Skrulls do have a plan, and her name is Lindy Reynolds.

[Monty_Cristo]

The Skrulls do have a plan, and her name is Lindy Reynolds.

was her getting machine-raped by Ultranny part of their plan?

[CyberHubbs]

The Skrulls do have a plan, and her name is Lindy Reynolds.

Huh. That would explain the "death" scene.

[Mark_S]

(I must apologize for the spelling error in the second line - 'What Tony was doing wasn't against the law...'. And I should have clarified that it was only the rebels that couldn't accept the change in the rule of Law).

Nevertheless, Laws written like the SHRA have to power to override Bill of Rights, just like the Terrorism changes that have come in the real world. What used to be rights, have now been overridden, so baggage restrictions have intensified, and targeted persons of interest are now commonplace.

The renegades just haven't accepted that they are targeted persons of interest in the SHRA case.

Yes, but bad laws can be challenged in courts. At least assuming any of the anti-sra crowd ever lives to reach a courtroom. But they won't be settled by marvel since marvel won't allow a law based story. So we are stuck with this argument through at least the rest of JQ's reign. We can't settle it, only marvel can settle it and I don't see marvel even wanting to try.

Mark_S

[TotalWorldDomination]

was her getting machine-raped by Ultranny part of their plan?

No, nor was the Sentry bringing the Skrull pretending to be his wife back to life.

dosn't stop the word Ultranny from being funny tho.


Yes, but bad laws can be challenged in courts. At least assuming any of the anti-sra crowd ever lives to reach a courtroom. But they won't be settled by marvel since marvel won't allow a law based story. So we are stuck with this argument through at least the rest of JQ's reign. We can't settle it, only marvel can settle it and I don't see marvel even wanting to try.

Mark_S

She-Hulk stated point blank that the SHRA was constitutional, in principal if not in practice. Not to mention Civil War: Supreme Court edition would be boring for 90% of the public. Then again, I'm one of the 10 who would start jumping around cheering if they actually did it. Can you imagine the Roberts Court ruling on this? I have no idea where some of the justices would side...

[Mark_S]

No, nor was the Sentry bringing the Skrull pretending to be his wife back to life.

dosn't stop the word Ultranny from being funny tho.



She-Hulk stated point blank that the SHRA was constitutional, in principal if not in practice. Not to mention Civil War: Supreme Court edition would be boring for 90% of the public. Then again, I'm one of the 10 who would start jumping around cheering if they actually did it. Can you imagine the Roberts Court ruling on this? I have no idea where some of the justices would side...

Yes, but She-Hulk had to be dumbed down for cw, otherwise she might have realized that the sra did allow SHIELD to draft her.

I reject the idea that a court issue would be boring, Law and Order has been on the air for years.

As to the Supreme Court, I think that a Robert's ruling might surprise you. Part of the conservative view on law is that the government does not have unlimitted power to regulate you life. But in the case of marvel it would depend on who was writing the story. They seem to have a fourth grade understanding of how the law works.

Mark_S

[TotalWorldDomination]

Yes, but She-Hulk had to be dumbed down for cw, otherwise she might have realized that the sra did allow SHIELD to draft her.

I reject the idea that a court issue would be boring, Law and Order has been on the air for years.

As to the Supreme Court, I think that a Robert's ruling might surprise you. Part of the conservative view on law is that the government does not have unlimitted power to regulate you life. But in the case of marvel it would depend on who was writing the story. They seem to have a fourth grade understanding of how the law works.

Mark_S

I agree. That's why I'm saying it would be so interesting. I could see Scalia and Ginsburg siding together against registration with Roberts and Stevens holding up the other end. That's a pretty strange set of pairings right there. Of course everyone on that case is a swing vote because we have no precedent for things like this. Would the Pro-Gun rights majority find superpowers equivocal to guns? Would the civil libertarians who are pro-Gun control go pro or anti. It would be a very interesting thing to see.

[Mr. Earl Brooks]

was her getting machine-raped by Ultranny part of their plan?

Doesn't matter. Whether she's a Skrull already or not, that's Sentry's weakness. Kill/swap the bitchand he goes straightback to Crazy Town, Population : Bob.

[mikekerr3]

Can we please cut the "Peter betray Tony" argument, because thanks to the story that is OMD and BND, that may not have occured in the first place. :mad:

If the argument didn't happen then a good chunck of the SW didn't happen, Cap would not have known about 42, and dozens of other things.

[jackolover]

The Skrulls do have a plan, and her name is Lindy Reynolds.

I haven't seen Lindy do much recently. She did talk to Tony and ask him to Kill Bob. Does that count?

[mikekerr3]

I haven't seen Lindy do much recently. She did talk to Tony and ask him to Kill Bob. Does that count?

Do I detect sarcasm?:biggrin:

[XPac]

No, nor was the Sentry bringing the Skrull pretending to be his wife back to life.

dosn't stop the word Ultranny from being funny tho.



She-Hulk stated point blank that the SHRA was constitutional, in principal if not in practice. Not to mention Civil War: Supreme Court edition would be boring for 90% of the public. Then again, I'm one of the 10 who would start jumping around cheering if they actually did it. Can you imagine the Roberts Court ruling on this? I have no idea where some of the justices would side...

Reread exactly what She-Hulk said. She-Hulk stated that a superHERO registration was constituional... but a superHUMAN registration was not. What did we end up getting?

[Berkey]

I can't beleive the SHRA is getting so much talk still. Personally I think the whole civil war idea fell through and Marvel realized that they had potential, but it hasn't paid off. The series itself, the inititative all of if not to mention killing cap on that crappy crossover instead of having him save the day here or something. I think secret Invasion was planned out years ago and was slotted for release about this time to counter the affects of the Civil War.

[Tobias Drake]

I can't beleive the SHRA is getting so much talk still. Personally I think the whole civil war idea fell through and Marvel realized that they had potential, but it hasn't paid off. The series itself, the inititative all of if not to mention killing cap on that crappy crossover instead of having him save the day here or something. I think secret Invasion was planned out years ago and was slotted for release about this time to counter the affects of the Civil War.

Nitpick: Cap wasn't killed on the crossover. He was killed in his own title in the aftermath, and it had very little to actually do with the crossover and everything to do with Red Skull's plan that he'd been working on for 25 issues prior.

[Berkey]

Nitpick: Cap wasn't killed on the crossover. He was killed in his own title in the aftermath, and it had very little to actually do with the crossover and everything to do with Red Skull's plan that he'd been working on for 25 issues prior.

He died in his own title, which that issue was directly related to the events (aftermath)of the War. Agreed that it wasn't in the actually series, but it still was based on that event. And I never said anything about red skull not having anything to do with it, I ment he died during (or technically after the war) which was the wrong time to do so, because everyone relates the war and cap's death together. Besides the Red Skull picked the perfect time to strike, when the war was over and the mantle of Cap was low which was due to the war. Any way I don't want to talk about the SHRA anymore it has already been beat to death lets focus on something new like the Invasion, which this thread is about

[mikekerr3]

Nitpick: Cap wasn't killed on the crossover. He was killed in his own title in the aftermath, and it had very little to actually do with the crossover and everything to do with Red Skull's plan that he'd been working on for 25 issues prior.

Without the SHRA he wouldn't have been on the parade "perp walk" that made it so easy.

[Bryson the Red]

Without the SHRA he wouldn't have been on the parade "perp walk" that made it so easy.

No, he would have been in a park, or his apartment, or a school. It was a plan that was unrelated to Civil War, and planned outside of comics. It was going to happen, just a matter of when and where. Really SHRA has nothing to do with it, it just helps the drama.

[XPac]

No, he would have been in a park, or his apartment, or a school. It was a plan that was unrelated to Civil War, and planned outside of comics. It was going to happen, just a matter of when and where. Really SHRA has nothing to do with it, it just helps the drama.

Well, we'll never know what might have happened or now had CW not occured... but the fact is CW did happen and the SHRA did play a role in how his death occured. All we can do is debate and discuss what actually happened, rather than what could have happened.

I think a good arguement can be made that had Steve not been in custody, handcuffed and without his SHIELD, he wouldn't have been killed when Crossbones shot at him. Red Skull has tried many times to kill Cap... this is the first time he has actually suceeded. And I think it's fair to argue that CW ended up greatly contributing to the vulnerable position he found himself in.

[Bryson the Red]

Well, we'll never know what might have happened or now had CW not occured... but the fact is CW did happen and the SHRA did play a role in how his death occured. All we can do is debate and discuss what actually happened, rather than what could have happened.

I think a good arguement can be made that had Steve not been in custody, handcuffed and without his SHIELD, he wouldn't have been killed when Crossbones shot at him. Red Skull has tried many times to kill Cap... this is the first time he has actually suceeded. And I think it's fair to argue that CW ended up greatly contributing to the vulnerable position he found himself in.

All I'm saying is that his death was planned. We, as readers know that. We are led to assume that Skull finally had a plan that was good enough to work. Maybe he needed that extra luck of a super human civil war, but I like to think that really detracts from the story. I'm assuming Cap was killed because of a well played, long planned conspiracy, and not blind luck. You're right though, there really isn't much point in arguing it though. It is what it is.

[Expletive Deleted]

If we could steer this back towards the topic of Secret Invasion, that'd be great.

[Tobias Drake]

Well, we'll never know what might have happened or now had CW not occured... but the fact is CW did happen and the SHRA did play a role in how his death occured. All we can do is debate and discuss what actually happened, rather than what could have happened.

I think a good arguement can be made that had Steve not been in custody, handcuffed and without his SHIELD, he wouldn't have been killed when Crossbones shot at him. Red Skull has tried many times to kill Cap... this is the first time he has actually suceeded. And I think it's fair to argue that CW ended up greatly contributing to the vulnerable position he found himself in.

Actually, had Cap not been in custody, handcuffed, and without his shield, he still would have taken a bullet that was aimed at someone else. It's what heroes do. And he still would have been every bit as vulnerable to three point-blank shots by his girlfriend that he never saw coming, because he never saw it coming.

[Expletive Deleted]

Actually, had Cap not been in custody, handcuffed, and without his shield, he still would have taken a bullet that was aimed at someone else. It's what heroes do. And he still would have been every bit as vulnerable to three point-blank shots by his girlfriend that he never saw coming, because he never saw it coming.But were either of them Skrulls?

[jackolover]

Do I detect sarcasm?:biggrin:

It wasn't strictly sarcasm. I was fishing.

[Harding Prime]

Actually, had Cap not been in custody, handcuffed, and without his shield, he still would have taken a bullet that was aimed at someone else. It's what heroes do. And he still would have been every bit as vulnerable to three point-blank shots by his girlfriend that he never saw coming, because he never saw it coming.

But the only reason he died from the gunshot wounds because he was wearing power draining hand-cuffs. Who placed those on them, because he turned himself in, they were totally unnecessary.

[XPac]

Actually, had Cap not been in custody, handcuffed, and without his shield, he still would have taken a bullet that was aimed at someone else. It's what heroes do. And he still would have been every bit as vulnerable to three point-blank shots by his girlfriend that he never saw coming, because he never saw it coming.

Had he not be handcuffed and in position of his SHIELD, how much do you wanna bet the gunshot attempt would have been far less effective? History has shown it to be a pretty effective tool at protecting both himself and others from bullets.

Skull has likewise tried using a girlfriend (the Diamondback lmd) against Cap. Didn't work either. Skull has tried killing Cap a million differnet times... I don't think it's sheer coindicence that the only time he's failed is when Cap is captured by SHIELD and rendered helpless.

[Bryson the Red]

So... what was that jello stuff around the SWORD guys when the station blew up?

[Harding Prime]

Had he not be handcuffed and in position of his SHIELD, how much do you wanna bet the gunshot attempt would have been far less effective? History has shown it to be a pretty effective tool at protecting both himself and others from bullets.

Skull has likewise tried using a girlfriend (the Diamondback lmd) against Cap. Didn't work either. Skull has tried killing Cap a million differnet times... I don't think it's sheer coindicence that the only time he's failed is when Cap is captured by SHIELD and rendered helpless.

The entire Heroes Return Cap story arc is about Skrulls trying to kill Cap and take over his mantle. They were rogue Skrulls, at the time, but now who knows.

[Beast]

So... what was that jello stuff around the SWORD guys when the station blew up?
Some sort of emergency escape bubble in case of massive decompression.

Like a portable lifeboat.

[Bryson the Red]

Some sort of emergency escape bubble in case of massive decompression.

Like a portable lifeboat.

Has it been used before or was that just a safe assumption?

[mikekerr3]

Has it been used before or was that just a safe assumption?

Safe assumption almost a cliche' in bad Sci-Fi

[Netley]

Nah I don't think they were playing that "Sue Storm has been a skrull infiltrator" card. They just had a skrull walk into the Baxter building, pose as Sue Storm (with undetectable abilities in tow), and blast a chunk of it into the Negative Zone.

It was probably done to not interfere with Mark's FF which is the smart way to do it. You can tell that it's during his run though since they're wearing the Bryan Hitch designed costumes.

Totally agree about the first part, but I hadn't caught that those were Hitch's costumes - good eye!

Is the Millar/Hitch run basically 16 issues that ALL take place before SI? I can't quite figure that out. The stories are supposed to be totally separate, but for 8 issues they're going to be completely parallel (with the characters also appearing in the SI mini too), and I get the feeling that M&H aren't going to address the events of SI or deal with its repercussions at all or anything. ...How does this work? (And don't say "it's just comic books" - I mean, how does this work out in Marvel-time/the continuity they've set up?

Millar & Hitch's run entirely taking place before SI seems to be the only way I can think to make sense of that.


But the only reason he died from the gunshot wounds because he was wearing power draining hand-cuffs. Who placed those on them, because he turned himself in, they were totally unnecessary.

Good point! We know SHIELD has been rotten for years, so I can't wait to see how they tie together what Bru's doing in Cap with SI. So far they seem completely unrelated, but I don't think that will be for too long, and SHIELD and Fury are their biggest connections!


Some sort of emergency escape bubble in case of massive decompression.

Like a portable lifeboat.


Has it been used before or was that just a safe assumption?

I'd never seen it before in MU continuity, but thought it was an emergency air supply too (reminds me of that "Air Supply" Family Guy bit...anyone?). Didn't seem like much of an assumption to me though, Brand even says something like "mayday, we only have ten minutes left of air" right before she sees the oncoming Skrull fleet. (AWESOMELY drawn oncoming Skrull fleet, that is!)

[gorthon616]

Good point! We know SHIELD has been rotten for years, so I can't wait to see how they tie together what Bru's doing in Cap with SI. So far they seem completely unrelated, but I don't think that will be for too long, and SHIELD and Fury are their biggest connections!

I think they have said that's Bru's run is completely isolated from the MU. So I doubt we'll have any "SHIELD corruption" directly playing into Cap's death or Bru's arc.

[CMBMOOL]

Totally agree about the first part, but I hadn't caught that those were Hitch's costumes - good eye!

Is the Millar/Hitch run basically 16 issues that ALL take place before SI? I can't quite figure that out. The stories are supposed to be totally separate, but for 8 issues they're going to be completely parallel (with the characters also appearing in the SI mini too), and I get the feeling that M&H aren't going to address the events of SI or deal with its repercussions at all or anything. ...How does this work? (And don't say "it's just comic books" - I mean, how does this work out in Marvel-time/the continuity they've set up?

Millar & Hitch's run entirely taking place before SI seems to be the only way I can think to make sense of that.





Actually one of their future issues happens to deal with Dr. Doom's Breakout in SI #1.

[Monty_Cristo]

So... what was that jello stuff around the SWORD guys when the station blew up?

what color was it? if it was red, i'm guessing "strawberry."

[Jackob]

what color was it? if it was red, i'm guessing "strawberry."

no it was clearly lime jello

[Netley]

I think they have said that's Bru's run is completely isolated from the MU. So I doubt we'll have any "SHIELD corruption" directly playing into Cap's death or Bru's arc.

Really? They've said "completely isolated" for sure?

I hope that's just Quesada taking some more "creative liberties" with the truth (in a "Stan Lee created Sentry decades ago" way) to just catch us more off guard or something, because I want to see these storylines cross over!

I mean, we have a version of Cap (that seriously has to be a Skrull though, right?) that just showed up in front of both Avengers teams, the Earth is soon to be fully invaded by GIANT spaceships full of Skrulls, and all the craziness with SHIELD/Fury/Dugan/not-yet-revealed-infiltration HAS to effect Bucky/Cap!

And Bru's so good at espionage, I hope he gets to play with Skrulliness at least a little!

...Or is Marvel using the same logic for Cap and SI as they are for Millar/Hitch's FF run? ...Which I still can't figure out how that works haha!

EDIT:

Actually one of their future issues happens to deal with Dr. Doom's Breakout in SI #1.

Oh! Rad!!!

[Monty_Cristo]

no it was clearly lime jello

but there was stuff floating in it. must be tapioca.

[Netley]

but there was stuff floating in it. must be tapioca.

This is not well known, but it has been established that tapioca pudding has a kryptonite-like effect on Skrull shapeshifting powers.

It think there's more to this theory of yours than you realize.

[Monty_Cristo]

This is not well known, but it has been established that tapioca pudding has a kryptonite-like effect on Skrull shapeshifting powers.

It think there's more to this theory of yours than you realize.

where's that surprised groundhog picture when i need it?!

[gorthon616]

Really? They've said "completely isolated" for sure?

I hope that's just Quesada taking some more "creative liberties" with the truth (in a "Stan Lee created Sentry decades ago" way) to just catch us more off guard or something, because I want to see these storylines cross over!

I mean, we have a version of Cap (that seriously has to be a Skrull though, right?) that just showed up in front of both Avengers teams, the Earth is soon to be fully invaded by GIANT spaceships full of Skrulls, and all the craziness with SHIELD/Fury/Dugan/not-yet-revealed-infiltration HAS to effect Bucky/Cap!

And Bru's so good at espionage, I hope he gets to play with Skrulliness at least a little!

...Or is Marvel using the same logic for Cap and SI as they are for Millar/Hitch's FF run? ...Which I still can't figure out how that works haha!

EDIT:


Oh! Rad!!!

Well, I think Bru has said his storyline is meant to chug along independently of what is going on in the MU. IMO that pretty much meant the story is self-contained.

Bendis has said that New Cap will appear in SI, but as for tying into Bru's storyline, I pretty much think the chances are nil. I mean the stuff going on in Bru's story is basically ignored by most of the MU.

[jackolover]

I can't beleive the SHRA is getting so much talk still. Personally I think the whole civil war idea fell through and Marvel realized that they had potential, but it hasn't paid off. The series itself, the inititative all of if not to mention killing cap on that crappy crossover instead of having him save the day here or something. I think secret Invasion was planned out years ago and was slotted for release about this time to counter the affects of the Civil War.

It would be nice if that were right, but on another level it would still be nice to see this post-CW world a little longer. I'd still like some things tied up, like TBolts, and Initiative. If Spiderman hadn't retreated into his little fantasy world, it would have been good to see an eventual Parker/Osborn showdown, with each other on opposite sides of the law. That would have been so cool. Too bad.

[jackolover]

So... what was that jello stuff around the SWORD guys when the station blew up?

Air pockets, is my guess, but scientifically the vacuum of space would have sucked all the air out of a breeched space station.

[Tobias Drake]

It would be nice if that were right, but on another level it would still be nice to see this post-CW world a little longer. I'd still like some things tied up, like TBolts, and Initiative. If Spiderman hadn't retreated into his little fantasy world, it would have been good to see an eventual Parker/Osborn showdown, with each other on opposite sides of the law. That would have been so cool. Too bad.

Spider-Man IS going to fight the Thunderbolts in an upcoming arc.

[XPac]

Spider-Man IS going to fight the Thunderbolts in an upcoming arc.

I'm actually curious if that will end up being the long awaited NA/TBolt fight, or if this will basically be Spidey tackling the TBolts single handedly.

[jackolover]

Spider-Man IS going to fight the Thunderbolts in an upcoming arc.

I'm so glad you reminded me of that. Thanks Mags

[The Black Guardian]

Air pockets, is my guess, but scientifically the vacuum of space would have sucked all the air out of a breeched space station.
They were some kind of breathing apparatus.

[Harding Prime]

I think they have said that's Bru's run is completely isolated from the MU. So I doubt we'll have any "SHIELD corruption" directly playing into Cap's death or Bru's arc.

But the fact that he was wearing depowering hand cuffs was told in Jeph Loeb's Fallen Son. That could definetly be tied in.

[jackolover]

Now that Dum Dum Dugan Skrull is dead, it behoves us to realise that Dugan arranged for the Doomdsday device to get installed around Manhattan, (as directed to Dugan by Tony Stark in WWH Iron Man #20), and most probably informed the Skrull meetings he regularly goes too, before his suicide. If that is the case, then the Skrulls have a very horrible punishment or bartering tool to use against any resistance to Skrull occupation, and can probably manufacture and place these devices at other locations around the globe, now that they know the technology to make them.

The only possible way the Doomsday Device doesn't fall into the hands of the Skrulls, is if there is a continuity error, and the Dugan in IM #20 was still human, and gets killed by Valentina Skrull much later, (and after WWH), than Bendis is giving us in the SI Prologue.