Ultimates Vol. 2 #4 Discussion (Spoilers)

[Jomero]

Haven't seen a thread for this issue yet, so I guess I'll get it started.

The issue revolves around Thor, and teaming up with supersoldiers from other countries (that seemed kinda weird to me, but then I don't follow Avengers in regular MU) to help take him down. We learn that Thor is no norse god after all, that he is just a superthief of vastly sophisticated technology which is what gives him flight, strength, and control over electrical fields.

When Thor is cornered and confronted, he tries to explain that it's all a ruse by Loki. Who to believe, who to believe?

Personally, my gut says that it really is Loki behind it all. But I would be less disappointed if the story about Thor being a delusional regular human-thief turned out to be true. This is an alternate universe after all, and quite a few Ultimate's characters are vastly different from their regular counterparts. So why not Thor? I don't know if Millar has the balls to do that though.

Thoughts?

[Mike Smash!]

Well, since Cronin deleted the first thread, I think I'll at least put up the Loki thing:

It's pretty much agreed on that Gunnar, Thor's brother, is Loki and that the whole "super soldier" story is a huge lie.

If you look, you can see Gunnar/Loki in the bottom left hand corner of the page during the protest (wearing green too!)

And you can see him all the way back in #1, where he's in the background during Thor's conversation with Volstagg, while Thor is taking a sip from his beer.

He's a tricky one.

[Gaz]

Well, since Cronin deleted the first thread, I think I'll at least put up the Loki thing:

It's pretty much agreed on that Gunnar, Thor's brother, is Loki and that the whole "super soldier" story is a huge lie.

If you look, you can see Gunnar/Loki in the bottom left hand corner of the page during the protest (wearing green too!)

And you can see him all the way back in #1, where he's in the background during Thor's conversation with Volstagg, while Thor is taking a sip from his beer.

He's a tricky one.
Ah, Brian got annoyed by the politics? I wondered where it went.
Yeah, I figured that in V1, the Skrull bomb feat just felt too "godly" to be just regular powers.

[Kidmidnight]

Yep, Gunnar is Loki. He is in the bar and the croud wearing the same clothes. I always did think that smirk from the guy in green in the bar was weird. Thor is going to destroy the Ultimates. I wonder what's going to happen when they can't lift his hammer, or somehow remove his shirt and still has super strength.

[StoneGold]

Just spewing out ideas here, but what if instead of Gunnar is Loki, what if Loki is Gunnar? What if what we think is Loki is just Gunnar keeping tabs on Thor? Not saying that's what I'm thinking is happening, just ideas.

[Jomero]

Yeah, my gut said it was really Loki. But I think Thor being a regular albeit psychotically deluded human would make for a more interesting story.

[RonnieThunderbolts]

Also, in issue 1, Volstagg was there UNTIL Gunnar walked by. Panel with Volstagg, smirking Gunnar in next panel, behind Thor, and then POOF... that is when Thor is approached about him talking to himself. It really does seem like he's Loki as I look back and think about. I got the feeling upon first reading, but the more I look at the details, the less possible it seems that Thor isn't being set-up by his evil brother.

At the protest, night club, and at the Terrace in the Sky restaurant Gunnar is ALWAYS smirking/smiling. That doesn't make sense as him checking in on his crazy brother, but it DOES make sense as the God of mischeif. As others pointed out in the deleted thread, he isn't holding Mjolnir, but is holding a bottle of beer, sitting down leaning against a truck/jeep in volume one when Nick and Banner offer him a place on the Ultimates, yet he summons lightning. No hammer, just Thor.

So, I don't know, I think that it has got to be Loki. I definitely want it to be, I like Thor being around, as he was initially presented in Ultimates volume 1. All in all, I can't imagine that the Ultimates are going to be able to take him down easily either way, whether he is a God, or just the most powerful superhuman around. I mean, couldn't he just teleport them into the Marianas trench? Boom, dead Ultimates, right? I guess he is a pacifist, and therein lies the excitement of the story and potential for his defeat as a looming uncertainty, but in terms of sheer power, he has them all beat. If Quicksilver couldn't sneak up on him, then I think that they're pretty well screwed, unless Wanda's powers take on a more 616-ish deal and change from how they've been used so far. I am really excited for the next issue though.

[Kirk G]

Yeah, my gut said it was really Loki. But I think Thor being a regular albeit psychotically deluded human would make for a more interesting story.

You know, I think Marvel may be playing it both ways.... so if you want to believe one way, you can... and if you want to believe the other, you can believe that.

Personally, I like it that way. It makes the Ultimates universe all the more realistic to let t he reader make up their own mind.

But I'm willing to bet that Thor vanishes...and the Ultimates are left to wonder just what happened and what the truth was...

I think this will be the defining moment for the Avengers, er, Ultimates team to become their own and once again, it'll all be because of Loki (again...) :eek:

[Mike Smash!]

I don't think Thor will just teleport away. He knows a fight's coming. He told them in no uncertain terms that he wasn't going anywhere and made certain that his followers would be out of harm's way.

And based on the cover of the next issue, it's gonna be a fight.

Any thoughts on how that fight would go? Will Thor cut loose or will he try to talk?

Who's going to be crazy enough to attack Thor first?

[RonnieThunderbolts]

I don't think Thor will just teleport away. He knows a fight's coming. He told them in no uncertain terms that he wasn't going anywhere and made certain that his followers would be out of harm's way.

And based on the cover of the next issue, it's gonna be a fight.

Any thoughts on how that fight would go? Will Thor cut loose or will he try to talk?

Who's going to be crazy enough to attack Thor first?

Who said they thought he'd run away? I can't find it anywhere on this thread. I suggested he could just teleport the Ultimates into the marianas trench, at the bottom the ocean, instantly winning the fight, but nowhere do I see anyone mention 'porting away himself. Maybe I was unclear, or missed someone else's post. I totally agree, Thor has these guys out-powered, and they are totally without hope, unless there is some B.S. plot device coming up.

[Red State Cap]

Hard to say who will lead the attack. Captain America has the experience and more than enough courage, but he is probably the most physically outclassed among all the super-soldiers. Still, I guarantee he'll be one of the last standing and will go toe-to-toe until overwhelmed by Thor, who is about 50 times stronger.
Iron Man and Hawkeye have ranged attacks. They might lead off the attack.
It will be interesting to see how much damage the "morally clean" Thor does. Brian Braddock is probably safe since he's a fairly well-established Captain Britain in the MU. Captains France, Italy, and Spain, on the other hand, smack of "cannon fodder" to me.
Since Thor attacked Quicksilver without provocation, I think the Scarlet Witch will be more than a little ticked. Maybe we'll see the effects of Wanda's power finally. Incidentally, I wonder what legal authority Thor had to fire a potentially deadly lightning attack at someone who had not attacked him, or anyone else, as yet?

RSC

[discostu]

Hard to say who will lead the attack. Captain America has the experience and more than enough courage, but he is probably the most physically outclassed among all the super-soldiers. Still, I guarantee he'll be one of the last standing and will go toe-to-toe until overwhelmed by Thor, who is about 50 times stronger.
Iron Man and Hawkeye have ranged attacks. They might lead off the attack.
It will be interesting to see how much damage the "morally clean" Thor does. Brian Braddock is probably safe since he's a fairly well-established Captain Britain in the MU. Captains France, Italy, and Spain, on the other hand, smack of "cannon fodder" to me.
Since Thor attacked Quicksilver without provocation, I think the Scarlet Witch will be more than a little ticked. Maybe we'll see the effects of Wanda's power finally. Incidentally, I wonder what legal authority Thor had to fire a potentially deadly lightning attack at someone who had not attacked him, or anyone else, as yet?

RSC
Without provocation? Um, ex squeeze me? Baking powder? Quicksilver was coming in for the sneak attack, they were just hoping he was fast enough to get the hammer away from Thor before Thor realized it was gone.

[Gaz]

And why is everyone assuming every bolt is full lightning strength? 616 Thor can vary it to incapacitate, why can't Ult. Thor?

[BlaqueBolt]

At the protest, night club, and at the Terrace in the Sky restaurant Gunnar is ALWAYS smirking/smiling.



where in the nightclub? i keep looking and i do not see him in there

[Beatnikman]

Is anybody else a little ... I dunno ... let down, maybe, that two of the first big three fights the Ultimates will be involved in are against teammates? I appreciate they're not "missunderstanding-tussle-team up" kind of fights, but still ... another real bad guy might be nice. And it does look like we'll have one by the end of this arc, but it's still a little odd to me that they've spent more time fighting each other than outside threats.



But that aside, I do dig this title quite a bit. Hitch is just amazing.

[Red State Cap]

Quicksilver was coming in for a sneak attack? How do you know? Is that discussed anywhere in the book? What if he was merely trying not to get fried by lightning?
Thor attacked first and ruined any chance for a peaceful outcome.

RSC

[jelly [blank] of doom]

Pretty sure we solved this argument in the old thread... Thor can probably, more than likely, pretty obvioulsy control his lighting strikes from a stun gun type effect to an all out destroy attacking enemy's space ships strikes..

[Mike Smash!]

Who said they thought he'd run away? I can't find it anywhere on this thread.

It was here, by Kirk G:

But I'm willing to bet that Thor vanishes...and the Ultimates are left to wonder just what happened and what the truth was...

[Mike Smash!]

Since Thor attacked Quicksilver without provocation

I guess sneaking up on you in front of a planned attack force isn't provocation enough. The Ultimates were there to attack and arrest Thor, you know. Quicksilver was the first wave of it, probably looking to take him down at superspeed before he could fight if possible.

It's not like he was just going for a stroll. He was on a mission and Thor was the enemy.

Incidentally, I wonder what legal authority Thor had to fire a potentially deadly lightning attack at someone who had not attacked him, or anyone else, as yet?Again, you assume that Thor can't control his lightning's power.

Remember what he did to those Skrull ships. He didn't hit Quicksilver with one of those, certainly. He just knocked him out.

[Mike Smash!]

Quicksilver was coming in for a sneak attack? How do you know? Is that discussed anywhere in the book? What if he was merely trying not to get fried by lightning?
Thor attacked first and ruined any chance for a peaceful outcome.

He was there more than 20 minutes before those coming after him. They were planning to arrest Thor and most likely sent in Quicksilver to either attack him or try to get his hammer away from him. Either way, he was coming in at superspeed and I don't think you can make an argument that they sent him up to say "hi" to Thor.

They went in looking for a fight with him. They didn't try to contact him ahead of time or say "listen, Thor. We need to talk". They snuck up on him. Likely they didn't want Thor to know Quicksilver was there.

[Red State Cap]

Actually the Ultimate/EuroSuper team was there to ARREST Thor, not attack Thor. The determination of whether there will be an attack or not, is entirely in Thor's hands. He has the choice of either coming peaceably, or resisting arrest.
Show me where in the book it is stated that Quicksilver was the first wave of the "attack." Guess what, you CAN'T, because it isn't in the book.
You suggest that the Ultimate/EuroSuper team sent in Quicksilver. To attack Thor. Alone. Right.
The FACT is, that the Ultimate/EuroSuper team was there to ARREST Thor, and Thor ATTACKED FIRST. Period. Therefore, the Ultimate/EuroSuper team is entirely justified in using force against Thor.
Keep manufacturing non-existent justifications, and I'll happily keep knocking them down.

RSC

[Paradox]

While it's not "fact" that Pietro was there as a sneaky first wave against Thor, it's certainly reasonable to think so. It's a tactically smart move. If I was Thor, I'd have thought so, and likely reacted the same way.

"Ah, ah, ah...nice try. No. Not that easy."

[Jake V]

Ya gotta remember, a year prior, Quicksilver was a mutant terrorist who had absolutely no problem with killing large numbers of humans just cuz he could. Perhaps Thor feared for the safety of all those people who were hanging around him and took out Quicksilver.

Whatver the case, Quicksilver has the history of violence and murder, not Thor, and it's very funny that someone would come to the defense of a terrorist and murderer because the other guy has a leftist agenda.

[The Fury]

You suggest that the Ultimate/EuroSuper team sent in Quicksilver. To attack Thor. Alone. Right.
The FACT is, that the Ultimate/EuroSuper team was there to ARREST Thor, and Thor ATTACKED FIRST.

RSC
The Team attacking straight in would have been a bad move (and a stupid one besides) due to the amount of civilians around. To me Quicksilver was just running through, maybe taking a look at the situation before they moved in, Thor just stopped him.

But by the attitude of Ult Cap, a fight is there, he seems to like to solve problems with his fist, and this case will be no different (Even if he is completely out matched).

[Melissa]

Is anybody else a little ... I dunno ... let down, maybe, that two of the first big three fights the Ultimates will be involved in are against teammates? I appreciate they're not "missunderstanding-tussle-team up" kind of fights, but still ... another real bad guy might be nice. And it does look like we'll have one by the end of this arc, but it's still a little odd to me that they've spent more time fighting each other than outside threats.



But that aside, I do dig this title quite a bit. Hitch is just amazing.

I like the way that it supports that overall idea that this is an overpriced bunch of people waiting around with no legitimate target (except the Skrulls, obviously...)

I love the way Millar is writing this. It's easily the most intelligent Loki/Thor conflict I've seen. And the teammates' disbelief is how it'd be in real life. What would you do if you had a teammate who said he was Jesus? Would you believe him, or think him a nut? I know I'd think him a nut - even if he performed miracles and all...

And for the record, Thor will smash these guys into paste. Tissue-man (sorry, Iron Man) will be the next out of the fight, and the super-soldiers will be nothing to him. Look at ho impressed they were with Iron Man lifting the sub - they're obviously not in the same class.

It'll be good for Captain A-hole to be taken down a peg too. I like his aggressiveness but he's a little bit TOO sure he's right all the time.

[Melissa]

Actually the Ultimate/EuroSuper team was there to ARREST Thor, not attack Thor. The determination of whether there will be an attack or not, is entirely in Thor's hands. He has the choice of either coming peaceably, or resisting arrest.
Show me where in the book it is stated that Quicksilver was the first wave of the "attack." Guess what, you CAN'T, because it isn't in the book.
You suggest that the Ultimate/EuroSuper team sent in Quicksilver. To attack Thor. Alone. Right.
The FACT is, that the Ultimate/EuroSuper team was there to ARREST Thor, and Thor ATTACKED FIRST. Period. Therefore, the Ultimate/EuroSuper team is entirely justified in using force against Thor.
Keep manufacturing non-existent justifications, and I'll happily keep knocking them down.

RSC

Uh-huh.

So, um... what exactly was Quicksilver doing? Whatever it was, he was heading straight for Thor at super-speed. What kinds of things do YOU do when you run as fast as you can straight at someone?

[Mike Smash!]

Uh-huh.

So, um... what exactly was Quicksilver doing? Whatever it was, he was heading straight for Thor at super-speed. What kinds of things do YOU do when you run as fast as you can straight at someone?Some people suggested he was going to try to get Thor's hammer away from him. It makes sense, especially since they think it's a powerful weapon and the source of all of his weather powers.

It'd save themselves some bruises too.

[Mike Smash!]

Actually the Ultimate/EuroSuper team was there to ARREST Thor, not attack Thor. The determination of whether there will be an attack or not, is entirely in Thor's hands. He has the choice of either coming peaceably, or resisting arrest.
Show me where in the book it is stated that Quicksilver was the first wave of the "attack." Guess what, you CAN'T, because it isn't in the book.
You suggest that the Ultimate/EuroSuper team sent in Quicksilver. To attack Thor. Alone. Right.
The FACT is, that the Ultimate/EuroSuper team was there to ARREST Thor, and Thor ATTACKED FIRST. Period. Therefore, the Ultimate/EuroSuper team is entirely justified in using force against Thor.
Keep manufacturing non-existent justifications, and I'll happily keep knocking them down.

RSC

Notice that Thor yelled to the satellites to wait for his people to leave before they'd attack and Fury agreed. Fury called off the rest of the attack until that happened.

Quicksilver wasn't supposed to fight Thor on his own. He was either there to snatch his hammer or distract him, so that the others could strike and surprise him.

He wasn't just jogging through the woods for fun or stopping by to say "hi". He was running right at Thor at top speed. Thor knew they were after him. He'd have to be stupid to know that the Ultimates were about to attack him.

And it seems to me you have a nasty habit in these threads of stretching so that you can defend anyone from cops beating on unprovoked protestors or Cap assaulting a bouncer just doing his job.

But you go after Thor for defending himself when he's being snuck up on?

If the Ultimates just wanted to talk this over, Thor would have probably just invited them into that camp to talk to him.

You've "knocked over" nothing. What exactly WAS Quicksilver doing then?

[Doom Hammer]

Show me where in the book it is stated that Quicksilver was the first wave of the "attack." Guess what, you CAN'T, because it isn't in the book.


Can you understand the concept of "reading between the lines"? Just because the words "Hey, Quicksilver. ATTACK!" weren't uttered doesn't mean the intention wasn't there. It is suggested that Quicksilver was sent as a pre-emptive strike to catch Thor off-guard. Not as the main attack, and not just to "reason" with Thor. He was attempting to disable him.

For the purpose of argument, however, what do YOU think he was doing? (And it wasn't just scouting, because SHIELD was all over the scene and monitoring Thor's position and even speech. No scouting neccesary.)

[Red State Cap]

Quicksilver ends up at Thor's feet. However, in the two panels prior to that, as he is being attacked without provocation by Thor, he is clearly moving at an angle to Thor. The lightning comes from directly behind the observer's perspective (where Thor is) and Quicksilver is clearing moving at nearly a 90-degree angle to that perspective. He was trying not to get fried.
You've suggested that Quicksilver was trying to get the hammer away. First, Thor had the hammer in his grip the whole time. Second, what is the strength of Quicksilver relative to Thor, and thus what is the chance he's going to be able to separate Thor and the hammer? Slim to none. However, for purposes of storyline, I can at least in honesty concede that it's a possibility. Which is more than I can say for your intellectual honesty.
You've suggested that Quicksilver was "scouting." What would he be scouting, with Thor in clear view of the overhead satellite cameras, which would be downlinked directly to the Ult/Euro team? So, obviously he was not "scouting."
You've suggested that Quicksilver was there to "distract" him. How, exactly, is he going to do that? Tap him on the shoulder? And, a distraction or diversion presumes that an attack was ready. Clearly it was not. The Ultimate/EuroSuper team was there to ARREST Thor, first and foremost. After Thor's unprovoked attack and disabling of Quicksilver, did the Ult/Euro team immediately launch an attack, as you suggest? No! They walk out of the treeline and proceed to try to TALK to Thor, to convince him to surrender peacefully.

RSC

P.S. And you have a nasty habit of defending Thor, who is responsible for injuries and possible deaths at the riot in Italy, and is responsible for some portion of the Hulk's deaths in New York. Because you are politically sympathetic to Thor, any violence by Thor is justified, and any violence by anyone else, notably Captain America, is unjustified.

[stealthwise]

This book was just filled with stuff that made me juiced to see the next issue's battle, and it's probably the reason that I like it so much. I can't wait to see Cap and Thor duke it out, as Millar's created some truly interesting characters to conflict with one another.

[Karl J. Barnes]

Another reason why I think that Loki is behind these things, the title of this issue is "Brothers". Kind of gives some weight to Gunnar being Loki.

Maybe Loki, instead of Thor, was sent here by Odin to learn humility or to be punished. Loki as Gunnar was made mortal without any idea of who he truely was and then Thor appears and it some how jogs his memory. So by the end of the first volume of Ultimates, Loki has been working on not only bringing down Thor, but the Ultimates themselves.

[Dizzy D]

To answer Fury's question from the other thread that got closed:

I think the Captain's are (judging by colour)

From left to right:
-Portugal
-Sweden
-Greece (or Finland (unlikely seeing the woman's tan.)
-Ireland
-Switzerland, Austria, Denmark or Poland. (lots of countries going for red/white. If it's EU bound, Switzerland is out. Not a member. Poland is dependent on when the whole thing started) (As for Norway see below), Latvia is another possibility but their red is darker.)
-Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Netherlands or Luxembourg (Possibly Czech republic seeing the triangular shapes on the outfit, but if the project starter much earlier and is EU bound, Czech, Slovakia and Slovenia are out.)
- Belgium or Germany (Germany most likely)
- Britain
- Italy
-??? Estonia perhaps? (blue/white/black), but still not a good fit (I see blue/green).
-Switzerland, Austria, Denmark or Poland again.
- ??? Not enough seen.
- Spain
- France

As for Norway: it is not part of the EU and if the project was EU-bound it would be logical why they don't have a superhero to show for it. And it would take some minor mindtwisting of people in the room for Loki to suddenly explain the man with superpowers from Norway.

If the project is an older project; the red/whites are probably Denmark and Austria if it is E.U. bound and before the joining of the last countries.

[Mike Smash!]

Quicksilver ends up at Thor's feet. However, in the two panels prior to that, as he is being attacked without provocation by Thor, he is clearly moving at an angle to Thor. The lightning comes from directly behind the observer's perspective (where Thor is) and Quicksilver is clearing moving at nearly a 90-degree angle to that perspective. He was trying not to get fried.
You've suggested that Quicksilver was trying to get the hammer away. First, Thor had the hammer in his grip the whole time. Second, what is the strength of Quicksilver relative to Thor, and thus what is the chance he's going to be able to separate Thor and the hammer? Slim to none. However, for purposes of storyline, I can at least in honesty concede that it's a possibility. Which is more than I can say for your intellectual honesty.
You've suggested that Quicksilver was "scouting." What would he be scouting, with Thor in clear view of the overhead satellite cameras, which would be downlinked directly to the Ult/Euro team? So, obviously he was not "scouting."
You've suggested that Quicksilver was there to "distract" him. How, exactly, is he going to do that? Tap him on the shoulder? And, a distraction or diversion presumes that an attack was ready. Clearly it was not. The Ultimate/EuroSuper team was there to ARREST Thor, first and foremost. After Thor's unprovoked attack and disabling of Quicksilver, did the Ult/Euro team immediately launch an attack, as you suggest? No! They walk out of the treeline and proceed to try to TALK to Thor, to convince him to surrender peacefully.

RSC

P.S. And you have a nasty habit of defending Thor, who is responsible for injuries and possible deaths at the riot in Italy, and is responsible for some portion of the Hulk's deaths in New York. Because you are politically sympathetic to Thor, any violence by Thor is justified, and any violence by anyone else, notably Captain America, is unjustified.

First, I'll address you post script. We gave specific examples in the first thread on instances where Cap chose his level of force quite well. The Iraqi hostage situation for one. Cap knew that he didn't need to beat those men up, so he didn't. His presense and reputation would do all that for him and got the same result.

The instances that we question Cap on are nopt based on his political beliefs, but on him acting much less mature than he should be and taking action that could potentially harm innocent bystanders and cause massive property damage needlessly.

Even in the aftermatch on the Hulk situation, I have no problem with Cap kicking Banner to make sure that he didn't go Hulk again. He used force and stopped when it wasn't required anymore.

It's not about politics, it's about recklessness. With both Pym and Thor, Cap went into non-violent situations where no one was in immediate danger and made them violent situations. He could have either sucker punched Pym or sent in a SHIELD team to arrest him without a fuss.

He going in yelling at and pushing a man who has a history of violence, is already pissed at him, has had a few drinks and...oh yeah, can grow to 60 feet tall.

Like I said before, even in that alley, he could have fallen on that bar and killed someone. Not to mention the damage they did to that construction site that could have been avoided if Cap could be an adult and not coming looking for a fight.

The same thing with Thor. He went looking for a fight. He didn't have to assault that bouncer. I'm sure if he'd said "I'm Captain America, I need to talk to Thor", Thor would have invited him in. When Cap burst in and started yelling at him, Thor didn't get angry. He talked to Cap. He would have done the same if Cap had just come in as a guest and asked a man he'd fought along in the past for his side of the story directly.

And when I'm talking in terms of Cap and Thor, I'm not talking about liberal vs. conservative. I'm talking about someone acting rationally and someone acting irrationally. The politics of the characters has little to do with it.

As for Quicksilver, like they said, they had satellites all over Thor, so the only reason Pietro could be charging RIGHT AT HIM, based on both the satellite thermal shot and the fact that Quicksilver skidded to a stop right at him, that Pietro was coming in for an attack, quickly to be backed up by the rest of the Ultimates, who Fury called off.

Stealth had failed and they knew they couldn't surprise him, so they tried to talk him down. And Pietro could have likely gotten the hammer out of Thor's hand, unless this Mjolnir has the same rules as the regular Thor's hammer does.

And when most of us and just holding an object casually, how often are you gripping it with all your strength. The Ultimates knew that the hammer was a great part of Thor's powers, so they wanted to disarm him before picking a fight. And disarming someone is most definitely a hostile action.

Thor knew that the team was publically blaming him for the Banner papers being leaked. He saw that they abandoned Banner the minute he became a public liability. Even Fury admitted that Banner was being used as a "villain" for Manhattan and a "scapegoat" as Xavier called it.

Thor had already had Cap burst in on him making threats and all the pundits were blaming Thor on TV he was watching from the sidewalk. For PR reasons alone, they were likely to attack him.

And since it's not likely that Pietro was sent in to talk to him and he and Thor have never been shown to be friends. If they wanted to send in someone to appear non threatening to Thor to talk him down, they would've sent Tony. They're well established friends.

As for distractions, I assumed he'd do what a lot of superfast characters do in fights, zip around the guy really fast and dodge his blasts while the others sneak up on Thor. I doubt he could hurt the guy, but he could be a real annoyance.

The person who seems to be blinded by politics in all this, is you, RSC. No offense, but you've stretched this Quicksilver thing to the limit of reality without offering any alternative to what the hell Pietro was doing charging at Thor.

Like with your arguments over the "limited force" of Italian cops beating down protesters who were never shown to be violent or even rowdy, you seem to defend anyone who wields official authority or carries a badge or a flag, even when you can't explain the situation yourself.

If you'd excused the cops' actions due to Loki's presense, which was probably what set them off, I could buy that.

But my stance on all this isn't based on politics. Its on one character who uses force to stop violence on other people and stops when the violence does. And another man who makes situations that need not be violent into violent ones, mostly because he's in the mood to hit someone.

I'm judging actions by the actions and the situations surrounding them, not on the politicial worldviews of the people involved. With all due respect, you seem to pick a side and spin for it.

I'd still like to hear you opinion on what you think Quicksilver was doing...

[jetter_cheeze]

This being the Ultimate universe, i think I know how Millar is going to write Cap. Cap seems to have a knack for wanting to fight people, especially some people that would test his own limits or put up a really good fight against him. Cap usually throws himself into fights and hostile situations all the time. Is he doing this because he is a soldier and these are orders? I honestly think not. Is he doing it because he has a hair or some sort up his butt? This is closer to the answer.

CAp has lost everything. Time, family, and i believe hope. i think Cap has got a huge death wish. He has lost it in a sense. If anyone knows the sixth season of Buffy the VAmpire slayer, you know she did a lot of bad things (sleep with spike, get in insane fights) just to help her feel, because pain to her was a way of saying that she was alive. I think Cap has this same problem. The pain is makes reality seem real to him, its the only way he can feel something.

Why else would he go and sleep with wasp, awoman in the middle of a divorce? This would be something that back in Cap's time would be unheard of. i think he just lost it when he came back. If this is the way Millar is going to write him, then i say go with it. To me it explains his willingness to always go into fights and to go out and pick fights.

Any thoughts, or am i just the crazy one?

[kane]

I am still waiting for the issue, but i have a question. What about Thors hammer and the weather? In the ultimates he sometimes controlls the weather and the lightning without the hammer , sometimes with the hammer.

As far as i remember, he did not use the hammer, when he was visited by Fury and Banner, he also did not use the hammer, when Cap America came into the bar. In the first case he made rain and lightning, in the second case only lightning.

Does he need the hammer to control the weather like in the 616?. And what about the "only the worthy can lift the hammer" stuff.

[Red State Cap]

OK Mike, if you are stating that you are holding to what is actually in the book and not using a double standard, please, show me where Quicksilver, or any other Ultimate, attacked Thor first. I'll be waiting...
You state "It's not about politics, it's about recklessness..." when attacking CA's actions. OK, Mike, explain several police cars exploding, spraying burning gasoline, and flying through the air in the middle of a crowd. Oh, of course, THAT wasn't reckless. Of course, none of those cars had anyone in them, none of them landed on any hapless bystanders, and none of them doused the crowd with burning gasoline. That is, none of that happened because Thor is "morally clean." If Captain America had somehow done that, it would have been reckless and reprehensible. Am I right?
And let's addres the Hulk battle in New York. How many people do you think died unnecessarily while Thor was engaging in political blackmail? Thor is all about stopping violence and deaths, right? So what's he doing cooling his heels and allowing death and destruction on a massive scale to leverage political concessions? I'd really, really like to hear your explanation of the moral cleanliness of this action.

RSC

[jetter_cheeze]

OK Mike, if you are stating that you are holding to what is actually in the book and not using a double standard, please, show me where Quicksilver, or any other Ultimate, attacked Thor first. I'll be waiting...
You state "It's not about politics, it's about recklessness..." when attacking CA's actions. OK, Mike, explain several police cars exploding, spraying burning gasoline, and flying through the air in the middle of a crowd. Oh, of course, THAT wasn't reckless. Of course, none of those cars had anyone in them, none of them landed on any hapless bystanders, and none of them doused the crowd with burning gasoline. That is, none of that happened because Thor is "morally clean." If Captain America had somehow done that, it would have been reckless and reprehensible. Am I right?
And let's addres the Hulk battle in New York. How many people do you think died unnecessarily while Thor was engaging in political blackmail? Thor is all about stopping violence and deaths, right? So what's he doing cooling his heels and allowing death and destruction on a massive scale to leverage political concessions? I'd really, really like to hear your explanation of the moral cleanliness of this action.

RSC

FRom Thor's perspective: Hulk came from the AMERICAN program to create a supersoldier to be used in a super team. Something went wrong in the AMERICAN program and the AMERICAN mistake was attacking AMERICAN people. The AMERICAN government needed help with THEIR mistake. Thor is not an AMERICAN. Why should he help them, especially when they were saying he was a nutjob, as BANNER who is the HULK called him when Fury tried to recruit Thor? What reasons would Thor have for helping them? If the AMERICANS really needed his help (and that meant saying that they couldn't handle the Hulk, their own supercreation) then they could afford to help the world politically. It was more AMERICA'S choice if more people died or not, depending on how much embarassment they were willing to take.

ANd what were the reasons for Quicksilver going towards THor's location? The cameras seem to say that The Ultimates had enough visual servallance, so they wouldn't need Quicksilver there for that. They were told by Loki that some of Thor's power was in his hammer, could Quicksilver had been there for that? It's not necessarily an attack on Thor, its more of a disarmament. But you know the troops were right behind in order to arrest or fight Thor, based on Thor's reaction.

[Paradox]

Good lord, this must be why the first thread got closed.

Not everything's about politics. I, myself, couldn't give a crap. It's about previous portrayals, military strategy and extrapolating on that.

Seemed pretty normal and prudent to me that Thor would stop Pietro from coming at him. Was he right or wrong? Who knows? Perfectly in character as we've seen so far, and certainly nothing odd or out of control. It's pretty much what anyone would do, to my mind.

Stop carrying a political grudge.

[Red State Cap]

Okay Jetter, by the exact same logic you use, then Thor had no business interfering in the riot in Italy because he isn't Italian and has no legal standing there, and probably even no legal right to be in Italy.
Do you agree with that statement?

RSC

[Mike Smash!]

OK Mike, if you are stating that you are holding to what is actually in the book and not using a double standard, please, show me where Quicksilver, or any other Ultimate, attacked Thor first. I'll be waiting...
You state "It's not about politics, it's about recklessness..." when attacking CA's actions. OK, Mike, explain several police cars exploding, spraying burning gasoline, and flying through the air in the middle of a crowd. Oh, of course, THAT wasn't reckless. Of course, none of those cars had anyone in them, none of them landed on any hapless bystanders, and none of them doused the crowd with burning gasoline. That is, none of that happened because Thor is "morally clean." If Captain America had somehow done that, it would have been reckless and reprehensible. Am I right?
And let's addres the Hulk battle in New York. How many people do you think died unnecessarily while Thor was engaging in political blackmail? Thor is all about stopping violence and deaths, right? So what's he doing cooling his heels and allowing death and destruction on a massive scale to leverage political concessions? I'd really, really like to hear your explanation of the moral cleanliness of this action.

RSC
Before I respond, I will ask a fourth time. If Quicksilver wasn't attacking Thor or making hostile action towards him, what was he doing? You've yet to even give a weak answer on this.

No other answer remains aside from him either attacking Thor, distracting Thor long enough for his teammates to take him by surprise or to attempt to disarm him.

I'm waiting for an alternative that doesn't amount to hostile action.

And let me frame this first by saying that you seem to be the one looking at this debate in black and white terms, not me.

I've addressed more than one instance where Cap has shown restraint and shown responsible force. I'm just referring to several incidents where he acted immaturely and created violence where violence did not previously need to exist.

I will say that I like Ultimate Captain America as a character. He's interested, flawed, human, and I like the emphasis on the soldier and tactician role of the character that Millar is hitting in this book. I have never stated that Cap was horrible person, just at times very reckless, pig headed and immature in the way he wants to just hit someone because he's pissed.

These are all negative qualities you could also attribute to Green Arrow, Oliver Queen as well, and he's one of comicdom's most famous liberal superheroes. My political biases don't shield me from seeing that Ollie is a real prick sometimes and can be quite immature and reckless when emotions run high.

That's how I see Ultimate Cap. A good character who's very smart and has a strong moral core, but capable of doing some really dumb things sometimes.

The reason I like Thor is that not only is he a fascinating character and a very cool take on the idea of a character claiming godhood in the real world, much less taking on the claim of being someone from mythology, but he's unorthodox for a liberal character as well. Most liberal superheroes are angry and loud and are constantly sermonizing and screaming at people.

What I like about Thor is that despite his radical views, he's unfailing calm and polite nearly all of the time. He just doesn't get pissed and keeps his cool even when someone is screaming at him. His scene with Fury in the first volume about how he'd appreciate if he didn't yell at him is priceless.

And please don't misquote me. I didn't say that he was totally "morally clean", just that he was the "morally cleanest" of the team. I never implied that he was perfect, just that he seemed to hold back from engaging in violence or even anger in a way the rest of the team didn't.

Or never did you ask where I considered Cap in that running, as he's fairly high on that list, along with Tony, who's motives for being a hero are among the most altruistic. For the record, only two characters have ever objected to the coverup of the Hulk incident, Thor and Cap.

Everyone else either keeps it to themselves or doesn't care. As for the least morally clean, I imagine that Pietro and Wanda are down there as former terrorists and showing so much disdain for the pain for others, seeing it as an inconvenience to their fun. I suspect that the Black Widow has some ugliness in her closet that we haven't seen yet.

As for the actions of Thor, I'll explain best I can, and I have already. I made several concessions that you refuse to see. I stated above that Thor was probably overdoing it with destroying the police cars. I assume he was going for affect with that, as a big action to stop the violence with some lights and noise. I can't say how much control he has over his powers, but it seems pretty fine tuned to me, since he can go anywhere from taser gun strength to the type of blast that tears whole warships apart. Obviously Pietro isn't tougher than a Skrull warship.

But if you look at the last panel of Thor destroying those cars, you can see the cops, all alive looking up at him in shock. If Thor's powers are difficult to control, then yes it was a reckless thing to do. But if he has total control, then it was perhaps over the top, but I think that was his aim.

As for the Hulk incident and Thor "deal", I agree with you. Thor shouldn't have made deals when lives are at stake. I can hope that he would've showed up anyways had they said no, and based on his actions since then and his deal with Cap and Tony joining the team (that he wouldn't take any pay, but he'd always show up when lives are at stake) that he probably would have.

I can hope, but we'll never know for sure.

In the end, my opinion isn't based on personal politics so much as Thor is nearly always a nice guy and almost always reserves the use of force to situations where its required and Cap, though a good decent man with a good mind, has been prone towards getting violent needlessly because he's in the mood to hit someone.

Can I blame him for wanting to hit Pym? Nope. But he should know better.

[Mike Smash!]

Okay Jetter, by the exact same logic you use, then Thor had no business interfering in the riot in Italy because he isn't Italian and has no legal standing there, and probably even no legal right to be in Italy.
Do you agree with that statement?

RSCFirst of all, it wasn't a riot. It was a protest that Thor had likely organized. So it wasn't a coincidence that he was there. He probably has supporters in multiple countries.

That protest only became violent once Italian cops -- mostly likely provoked by Loki -- began beating the crap out of the peaceful demonstrators.

And I disagree with Jetter. I think that Thor had a moral obligation to help those people out. He may not be an American, but his mission has never been about national borders, it was about all humanity. He was here to "save the world", not just Norway. And he was being asked for help. We don't know how serious his ultimatum was. I'd hope that he planned on coming anyways, myself.

It's a good thing that Thor did show up. He's the only person aside from Cap, who was able to dent the Hulk at all.

[Mike Smash!]

I can't really see this fight going in the team's favor. Based on what we've seen Thor is a really really powerful...

I do want to compliment Millar on how this "is Thor crazy?" arc is being written. Until it was pointed out to me, I was convinced that Thor was delusional myself and even though I thought his heart was in the right place, I saw him the way the rest of the team saw him when they had him cornered.

We're comic fans, so it's not hard to imagine worlds where men can fly and lift tanks, but honestly how would you react to a guy claiming to be a god and that his evil half brother is behind everything?

The twist of him actually being for real is too cool. How do you think the Loki reveal will go down?

[Red State Cap]

In the spirit of intellectual honesty, I will address your only valid question, namely "what is Quicksilver doing." I personally think that, if Millar has even given thought to this issue, it's likely that he will be revealed to have been trying to get the hammer away. Not that I think this is a smart tactical move, but it wouldn't surprise me if Millar either planned it this way, or retcons it this way.
That said, I expect you to give an intellectually honest answer to MY questions, which you have yet to do.
You continue to state that you have "made concessions," yet you continue to apply a double standard. You continue to attack Cap on the basis of reckless behavior (i.e. the pub incident) yet you continue to minimize and gloss over actions by Thor that, on panel, represent a much greater danger to a greater number of bystanders than the actions you attack Cap for, which endangered about two people. Thor has engaged in acts which endangered greater numbers of people than Cap, yet Cap is still the reckless one? I'd like you to explain that.
Well, that's the question, isn't it? Is Thor a "nice guy?" Does a "nice guy" engage in political blackmail and delay that without question, REPEAT, without question, costs innocent lives? How many lives you you think Thor's blackmail and delay cost? Could it be perhaps 5% of the total casualties? Perhaps 10%? Perhaps 20%? That's between 40 and 160 DEAD PEOPLE, roughly. Now, tell me how many deaths Captain America has caused by his actions -- or refusal to act, as in Thor's case. Can you cite ANY? So, and I expect your intellectual honesty here, how is it again that you see Thor as "morally cleanER" than Captain America, given this fact?

RSC

[Red State Cap]

I think if Millar is really smart, he will in the next couple of issues throw contrary evidence that points to him being a nutjob and not a "god." The best thing for the longterm plot is to keep people guessing. Is he, or isn't he?
Since he thought to sprinkle Gunnar around in previous issues, which gets everyone to think that Thor is telling the truth about that at least, I think he'll let that stew for a couple of issues before dropping some hints that point the other way. In fact I think it's possible he has ALREADY dropped some contrary hints that will be pointed back to, ala Gunnar in the restaurant.
I'm not sure I like where things are going, which given Mr. Millar's political leanings was probably inevitable, but it is keeping people interested for now.

RSC

[Paradox]

Red State Cap makes me crack wise:

Does a "nice guy" engage in political blackmail

It wasn't blackmail, it was extortion.

Just HATES it when people get crimes wrong. :p

[Paradox]

I'd still like it to be what I thought a while back.

He's a God AND he's nuts. Have him be so powerful that he's actually CREATED the whole "Loki/Falstaff/Asgard" thing subconsciously, including the whole "Gunnar plot".

Be a nice twist, anyway.

[Gaz]

OK, the blackmail incident. Thor may have intended to help all along but made the threat to push the US into helping save MILLIONS of lives in the Third World. He could have decided to fly to NYC in order to maintain the illusion of waiting.
RSC, it has been pointed out that Cap has acted reasonably and responsibly in some cases, often on missions. And Thor has been reckless and over-zealous at times to, often when his beliefs are involved. You accuse us of being too sympathetic to Thor and blindly justifying what he does when you do that for Captain America despite eveidence to the contrary. Your political leanings are clear in this argument and your accusations of a double-standard are hollow when you use one yourself.

[Mike Smash!]

In the spirit of intellectual honesty, I will address your only valid question, namely "what is Quicksilver doing." I personally think that, if Millar has even given thought to this issue, it's likely that he will be revealed to have been trying to get the hammer away. Not that I think this is a smart tactical move, but it wouldn't surprise me if Millar either planned it this way, or retcons it this way.
That said, I expect you to give an intellectually honest answer to MY questions, which you have yet to do.
You continue to state that you have "made concessions," yet you continue to apply a double standard. You continue to attack Cap on the basis of reckless behavior (i.e. the pub incident) yet you continue to minimize and gloss over actions by Thor that, on panel, represent a much greater danger to a greater number of bystanders than the actions you attack Cap for, which endangered about two people. Thor has engaged in acts which endangered greater numbers of people than Cap, yet Cap is still the reckless one? I'd like you to explain that.
Well, that's the question, isn't it? Is Thor a "nice guy?" Does a "nice guy" engage in political blackmail and delay that without question, REPEAT, without question, costs innocent lives? How many lives you you think Thor's blackmail and delay cost? Could it be perhaps 5% of the total casualties? Perhaps 10%? Perhaps 20%? That's between 40 and 160 DEAD PEOPLE, roughly. Now, tell me how many deaths Captain America has caused by his actions -- or refusal to act, as in Thor's case. Can you cite ANY? So, and I expect your intellectual honesty here, how is it again that you see Thor as "morally cleanER" than Captain America, given this fact?

RSCWith all due respect, I don't have a political axe to grind with you. And Cap's actions endangered far more than two people. In that crowded nightclub alone, there were hundreds of people and Cap was going after a guy with lightning powers. Do you remember how horrific the Great White fire was? One can only imagine what a fight between superheroes could result in.. Cap didn't just go prepared to fight, he went with the intention of fighting.

And with the Pym situation, even in the alley Cap pulled him into, Hank could have very well fallen on that bar or since he'd had a few drinks in him, grown to 60 feet while still inside.

But Cap didn't approach Pym to take him down quickly or get him to surrender, he was there to provoke him into a fight.

Like I've said many times before, he was making a situation violent when it didn't need to be.

Now I'd like to go into the rest of your post. First you now admit that it was very likely that Quicksilver was there to disarm Thor. This is a hostile action. Can you still say that Thor was unprovoked?

As for the rest, I'm not glossing over anything. The best I can do is base my opinions on what they "might have done" on the characters themselves and what they've done in the book. I'm basing my opinions of both Thor and Cap off of that.

It seems that I have to totally condemn Thor or treat any violence incident equally to prove "intellectual honesty" with you, even though you've thus far claimed:

The "mild force" of the Italian police attacking orderly peaceful protestors (without mentioning Loki's interference)

Explained away Cap's assault of a club bouncer with what boils down to "he got in his way".

Claimed that Thor zapping Quicksilver was unprovoked and when pressed admit that you believe that he was there to disarm Thor, a hostile action.

I have, in this thread, vouched for what I believe to be Cap's good character, admitted incidents where I thought that Thor was potentially reckless (he has a greater control over the damage he does with his powers than Cap does with his fists), admitted that Thor had a moral obligation to help the victims of the Hulk and said that using an ultimatum was wrong (though I still believe that Thor would have showed up anyways) and I've even given an example of a liberal character that I believed to be capable of the exact same sort of behavior that I accuse Cap of in this thread. I've also given examples of situations where I thought Cap acted responsible in his use of force -- the Iraq hostage situation for one.

Meanwhile, you've done nothing but give all negative of one character and all positive for the other, without fail, even when those explanations stretched logic.

I've conceded much more than you ever have in this thread and *I* use double standards?

[Red State Cap]

"May have intended." Hmm. What does that mean? I "may have intended" to do a lot of things, but I didn't do them.
Where he was was irrelevant, since he could be in the fight instantly by teleporting there. So, chilling out in New York is as reprehensible as chilling out in Norway.
So, doubling the US aid budget will save millions? What millions? And if doubling it will save millions, will not quadrupling it save more millions? Using your logic, Thor would be even more justified in extorting, say, the entire US budget, because "more people could be saved." Notwithstanding the small fact that he is in effect executing a coup and confiscating the monies of 275 million US citizens without a vote by Congress. Extortion is extortion, period.
It has been "pointed out" that Cap has acted reponsibly, but his "recklessness" in other cases is still cited as evidence of his overall thuggishness. Thor has also acted responsibly on occasions, and has acted recklessly on others. Egregiously so, in fact. Yet the reckless behavior is glossed over and the responsible behavior is heralded as evidence of his "moral cleanliness." That is a double standard, sir. You simply won't admit it.

RSC

[Red State Cap]

Mike,
You have not addressed Thor's actions in exploding police cars in a crowded setting.
You have not addressed Thor's sitting out while people are getting killed in New York.
Is it because you cannot?

RSC

[Gaz]

"May have intended." Hmm. What does that mean? I "may have intended" to do a lot of things, but I didn't do them.
Where he was was irrelevant, since he could be in the fight instantly by teleporting there. So, chilling out in New York is as reprehensible as chilling out in Norway.
So, doubling the US aid budget will save millions? What millions? And if doubling it will save millions, will not quadrupling it save more millions? Using your logic, Thor would be even more justified in extorting, say, the entire US budget, because "more people could be saved." Notwithstanding the small fact that he is in effect executing a coup and confiscating the monies of 275 million US citizens without a vote by Congress. Extortion is extortion, period.
It has been "pointed out" that Cap has acted reponsibly, but his "recklessness" in other cases is still cited as evidence of his overall thuggishness. Thor has also acted responsibly on occasions, and has acted recklessly on others. Egregiously so, in fact. Yet the reckless behavior is glossed over and the responsible behavior is heralded as evidence of his "moral cleanliness." That is a double standard, sir. You simply won't admit it.

RSC
You're guilty of the opposite though. Any force by Thor is reckless, unprovoked and rebellious, anything Cap does is totally justified and approvable. Is is a fact that millions die every year in Africa due to malnutrition?Is it a fact that the US, the largest economic power in the world, can help solve this by providing more aid than they currently do?
I do not believe that the ends justify the means and Thor was wrong to extort Bush like that but I can understand his viewpoint, "good of the many over that of the few"

[Gaz]

Mike,
You have not addressed Thor's actions in exploding police cars in a crowded setting.
You have not addressed Thor's sitting out while people are getting killed in New York.
Is it because you cannot?

RSC
Have you done that for Pietro without trying to say he wasn't being hostile, or attacking?
Have you explained why Cap attacked a bouncer instead of asking to see Thor who would have spoken with him?
Or why a good soldier would disobey orders and take a plane to find Hank Pym and provoke him instead of arrest him?

[Brian R]

God how I wish Brian was on to curb all this BS.

RSC, you are guilty of the very things you accuse Mike Smash of, I have rarely witnessed such an obvious case of Pot vs Kettle.

[Gaz]

God how I wish Brian was on to curb all this BS.

RSC, you are guilty of the very things you accuse Mike Smash of, I have rarely witnessed such an obvious case of Pot vs Kettle.
He did it last time as well. (meant Brian, but Mike and RSC did too)

[Mike Smash!]

Mike,
You have not addressed Thor's actions in exploding police cars in a crowded setting.
You have not addressed Thor's sitting out while people are getting killed in New York.
Is it because you cannot?

RSCI already have explained both of those above. You just didn't like the answer. There's a difference, friend.

For better reference, I just read both of those scenes:

I already said that Thor's recklessness in the first depends alot on the control he has over his powers. On a close viewing, I notice that he sent the cops flying first before exploding the cars. I can't justify the property damage, but it terms of endangerment, if Thor has fine control over his powers, it's not endangering the crowd. If his powers are difficult to control, it is quite reckless.

With the New York situation, I already said that extortion in that situation was wrong. We don't know however, if Thor would have shown up anyways. If he wouldn't have, it was morally wrong. If he would have and he was just trying to save lives through foreign aid (things like AIDS preventions, starvation, the tsunami type disasters, Peace Corps, which do save many many lives) it's very sketchy to set conditions.

I do get the impression that Thor would have shown up anyways, based on the character's behavior in other issues.

And no, that's not glossing it over. It's answering your question both ways, for both sets of unknowns.

The difference I made between Thor's actions and Cap's wasn't a double standard. The situations I criticize Cap on were those in which he needlessly created or attempted to create a violent situation in an area with several innocent bystander and did or would have created major property damage.

I've been willing to concede some points to you, but your arguments remain hostile and quite black and white.

[Red State Cap]

Gaz,
Before I give you my answers, let me be clear that I understand that you are incapable of intellectual honesty. So, I expect neither you nor Mike to respond with an honest answer -- you will simply and gleefully take my answer as yet more proof of your own position. That said:
1) If you had bothered to read above posts, I stated that I thought it was possible-to-probable that Millar intended Quicksilver to try to get Thors' hammer away. Since none of this is actually in the book, it's pure conjecture at this point.
2) Because he thought that Thor might have sent Banner to the chair, and he was pissed enough not to care too much about being gentle with making an entrance. Of course, on the other hand he restains himself as he is being spit upon when he could have put plenty of people in the hospital, too.
3) Because Cap was going to give Hank Pym exactly what he deserved, and Cap has the experience and the prestige to be able to ignore Nick Fury if he's dead set on it. Simple enough for you to understand?
Again, I don't even for a second expect that you can be as honest in answering my questions, so I'm not sure if this is worth my time.

RSC

[Brian R]

Gaz,
Before I give you my answers, let me be clear that I understand that you are incapable of intellectual honesty. So, I expect neither you nor Mike to respond with an honest answer -- you will simply and gleefully take my answer as yet more proof of your own position.
RSC

You need to come down off that cloud buddy, because last time I checked you had to treat other posters with some respect around here. "Incapable of intellectual honesty"? You keep repeating that, which leads me to believe that you find its a nice and easy way to ignore blunt answers given to you that you wish to simply ignore.

Cut the attitude and stop kidding yourself.

[Gaz]

Gaz,
Before I give you my answers, let me be clear that I understand that you are incapable of intellectual honesty. So, I expect neither you nor Mike to respond with an honest answer -- you will simply and gleefully take my answer as yet more proof of your own position. That said:
1) If you had bothered to read above posts, I stated that I thought it was possible-to-probable that Millar intended Quicksilver to try to get Thors' hammer away. Since none of this is actually in the book, it's pure conjecture at this point.
2) Because he thought that Thor might have sent Banner to the chair, and he was pissed enough not to care too much about being gentle with making an entrance. Of course, on the other hand he restains himself as he is being spit upon when he could have put plenty of people in the hospital, too.
3) Because Cap was going to give Hank Pym exactly what he deserved, and Cap has the experience and the prestige to be able to ignore Nick Fury if he's dead set on it. Simple enough for you to understand?
Again, I don't even for a second expect that you can be as honest in answering my questions, so I'm not sure if this is worth my time.

RSC

You seem to define honesty as agreeing with you, this is a discussion, where opinions are all valid.
1. You were adamant that he was running parallel to Thor at the start.
2. Possible, even probable but it was still impulsive and irresposible.
3. Explains his actions, doesn't justify them. I'd want to hit Pym as well, but not if it would make Janet feel worse or endanger bystanders.

[Gaz]

You need to come down off that cloud buddy, because last time I checked you had to treat other posters with some respect around here. "Incapable of intellectual honesty"? You keep repeating that, which leads me to believe that you find its a nice and easy way to ignore blunt answers given to you that you wish to simply ignore.

Cut the attitude and stop kidding yourself.
Thank you, Fever.
With that avi, it's like Li'l Kang saving us from the Big Guy! :D

[Red State Cap]

Could Thor also control where those cop cars landed, once he sent them flying? Or who might be under them? Or where the burning gasoline might land in a crowd?
If, as you state, Thor has such fine control over his powers, then is it not also true that Thor could have put on a display that would immediately stop any violence without actually striking any police or blowing up any cars in a crowded setting? Do you really think some cop is going to keep beating on someone with a 7" blond dude shooting lighting bolts over his head? So, since you credit Thor with fine control of his powers, and instead of using them in a way that could have ended the situation without further injuries or reckless acts, Thor chose to zap police and blow up cars. Despite the fact that you credit him with a good motive, he went right for the violent solution.
You have stated that Thor's extortion was morally wrong. However, you have not addressed the consequences. Can you give me a rough figure of how many people you think might have died as a result of Thor's extortion?
Address these points, please.

RSC

[Brian R]

Could Thor also control where those cop cars landed, once he sent them flying? Or who might be under them? Or where the burning gasoline might land in a crowd?
If, as you state, Thor has such fine control over his powers, then is it not also true that Thor could have put on a display that would immediately stop any violence without actually striking any police or blowing up any cars in a crowded setting? Do you really think some cop is going to keep beating on someone with a 7" blond dude shooting lighting bolts over his head? So, since you credit Thor with fine control of his powers, and instead of using them in a way that could have ended the situation without further injuries or reckless acts, Thor chose to zap police and blow up cars. Despite the fact that you credit him with a good motive, he went right for the violent solution.
You have stated that Thor's extortion was morally wrong. However, you have not addressed the consequences. Can you give me a rough figure of how many people you think might have died as a result of Thor's extortion?
Address these points, please.

RSC


Since when is it the job of other posters to cater to your every request? They answer the bigger questions, and now you start to nitpick because you sense defeat.

[Red State Cap]

Gaz,
Because, on panel, he IS running at an angle to them. Go check it. What I said was, Millar possibly-to-probably plotted it thusly.

RSC

[Red State Cap]

Actually, they haven't answered ANY of the big questions.

RSC

[Mike Smash!]

Gaz,
Before I give you my answers, let me be clear that I understand that you are incapable of intellectual honesty. So, I expect neither you nor Mike to respond with an honest answer -- you will simply and gleefully take my answer as yet more proof of your own position. That said:
1) If you had bothered to read above posts, I stated that I thought it was possible-to-probable that Millar intended Quicksilver to try to get Thors' hammer away. Since none of this is actually in the book, it's pure conjecture at this point.
2) Because he thought that Thor might have sent Banner to the chair, and he was pissed enough not to care too much about being gentle with making an entrance. Of course, on the other hand he restains himself as he is being spit upon when he could have put plenty of people in the hospital, too.
3) Because Cap was going to give Hank Pym exactly what he deserved, and Cap has the experience and the prestige to be able to ignore Nick Fury if he's dead set on it. Simple enough for you to understand?
Again, I don't even for a second expect that you can be as honest in answering my questions, so I'm not sure if this is worth my time.

RSCRSC,

I'd really like you to drop the hostile attitude. I've not talked to you like this in any of my posts and I'd appreciate if you'd do the same.

First of all, I've answered every question you've given me as honestly and fairly as I can. If you like them or disagree with them, that's alright. And drop the "intellectual dishonesty" line. I've been more fair to you in this discussion than you have to me.

I've conceded that Cap is a decent guy, specific incidents where he's acted very responsibily in his use of force, I've never talked of Thor as if he's morally perfect or free of any moral taint and have coceded many incidents and argued both sides of an unknown.

You, as far as I know, even admit that it's likely that Quicksilver was taking hostile action against Thor, yet still treat Thor as if he attacked him unprovoked. This is comparable to a bank guard not being allowed to act when a man with a ski mask and a shotgun walks into a bank until he specifically raises the gun and announces his intentions. After all, we don't know if he wasn't just making a deposit. Unless you think Thor should have waited for Pietro to attack him. Had Thor snuck up on *Pietro*, you might have something.

You've still never discussed Thor in any manner other than as a reckless person who endangers lives, without making any concessions on Cap's recklessness or on Thor's character. You simply assume the best of one and the worst of the other. Which invalidates any similar argument you've made against me.

And let me remind you that Cap could have probably just asked at the door to speak to Thor and based on Thor's calm reaction to Cap's entrance, even when he burst in, he probably would have just invited him in. And no matter what Cap thought, he had no evidence of Thor's wrongdoing. Just "conjecture" as you call it. He didn't walk up and say, "Thor, we don't see eye to eye on a lot, but you've fought beside me before and I want the truth, did you leak those papers or not?"

He didn't do that. He just burst in, insulted Thor, calling him a "sick freak" and screamed at him. He didn't want proof either. He just wanted a fight. You speak a great deal of Cap's restraint in not beating up the ravers, which is true, but you say nothing of Thor not blasting Cap out of the door for insulting him and his followers and assaulting the bouncer and knocking the door in.

Thor stated that he didn't want Banner to get the chair either. And when Thor's people acted like asses, he chastised them for it and apologized to Cap. Cap offered no such apology for the accusation, which Thor did a good job of disputing (enough so for Cap to leave) and he didn't apologize for that door, either.

And "experience" and "prestige" don't put Cap above the chain of command or the orders that he so respects, especially if he expects other people to do the same. And no one has defended what Hank Pym did, but Cap could have done what he did in a much smarter, safer and mature way. Did Hank deserve an asskicking? Sure. But that doesn't give Cap the right to give him one.

You speak of glossing things over, but you've glossed over Cap's assault of the bouncer as "Cap being pissed" which is no excuse, especially for a guy as disciplined as Cap. Cap had good reason to knock down that door in Iraq, but this was just gratutious. He played an Ace when all he needed was a Deuce.

And "experience' and "prestige" doesn't give him the right to disobey an order from Fury and go looking for a fight with another superhero in the middle of a crowded nightclub.

And again, drop the hostile, condescending attitude about us trying to swindle you because you come to different conclusions than you or don't like the answers. I haven't treated you with half the disrespect you've shown me and I don't plan to.

I'm not looking to fight you and I don't want to. I've answered your questions more thoroughly than you've answered mine.

[Mike Smash!]

Could Thor also control where those cop cars landed, once he sent them flying? Or who might be under them? Or where the burning gasoline might land in a crowd?
If, as you state, Thor has such fine control over his powers, then is it not also true that Thor could have put on a display that would immediately stop any violence without actually striking any police or blowing up any cars in a crowded setting? Do you really think some cop is going to keep beating on someone with a 7" blond dude shooting lighting bolts over his head? So, since you credit Thor with fine control of his powers, and instead of using them in a way that could have ended the situation without further injuries or reckless acts, Thor chose to zap police and blow up cars. Despite the fact that you credit him with a good motive, he went right for the violent solution.
You have stated that Thor's extortion was morally wrong. However, you have not addressed the consequences. Can you give me a rough figure of how many people you think might have died as a result of Thor's extortion?
Address these points, please.

RSCYou again fail to acknowledge that Thor didn't create the violent situation (the cops attacking the protestors), he just answered it and ended it.

Cap, in both the Pym and Thor situations, was walking into a situation where no violence existed, looking for a fight in a populated area.

You continue to demonize Thor to the nth degree on the smallest detail, but gloss over the Cap's actions, like the fact that that bouncer and Hank Pym could have been passed WITHOUT violence.

You've yet to admit the disconnect in your logic where you admit that Quicksilver was likely taking hostile action against Thor, but then say Thor zapping him was unprovoked.

And you're putting words into my mouth. I gave two scenarios for each of your questions, based on unknowns. It's obvious that Thor has a level of control over his power. The unknown was how much control.

The same with the New York situation. The unknown was whether Thor's conditions were a bluff or not. I suspect they were. I answered, again, for both possibilities.

And you ask for minute details that I can't give in figures, but brush over any hypotheticals I give -- and likely ones -- as "conjecture".

I've offered alternatives to everyone one of the actions that Cap has taken that I criticized, all the while, being willing to not blindly defend Thor, but offer real reasons for my conclusions. Reasons that don't include, "he was pissed off", "they deserved it", "they got in his way" or "he's got prestige, so the rules don't apply to him".

You haven't done the same, and continue to attack with a thin brush and defend with a wide one.

I still don't understand why you seem to be taking this so seriously. Calm down. And being intellectually honest doesn't mean I have to come to the same conclusions as you.

[Mike Smash!]

Actually, they haven't answered ANY of the big questions.

RSCI have. You just didn't like the answers I gave.

[The Fury]

I think the Captain's are (judging by colour)

From left to right:
- Portugal
- Sweden
- Greece (or Finland (unlikely seeing the woman's tan.)
- Ireland
- Belgium or Germany (Germany most likely)
- Britain
- Italy
- Spain
- France

Sweden and Ireland, now that makes sense, I couldn't work out Blue/Yellow becuase it seemed to dark of a blue, but that is good. And Yeah Greece by the look of the woman.


-??? Estonia perhaps? (blue/white/black), but still not a good fit (I see blue/green).
-Switzerland, Austria, Denmark or Poland again.
-Switzerland, Austria, Denmark or Poland. (lots of countries going for red/white. If it's EU bound, Switzerland is out. Not a member. Poland is dependent on when the whole thing started) (As for Norway see below), Latvia is another possibility but their red is darker.)
-Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Netherlands or Luxembourg (Possibly Czech republic seeing the triangular shapes on the outfit, but if the project starter much earlier and is EU bound, Czech, Slovakia and Slovenia are out.)

I guess for the rest it's just what we think may as well be true, I don't think we'll see much of anyone besides Britian, Italy, Spain and France (as stated in the book they are the only ones ready). We might never see them again fro a while or they may never be named.


As for Norway: it is not part of the EU and if the project was EU-bound it would be logical why they don't have a superhero to show for it. And it would take some minor mindtwisting of people in the room for Loki to suddenly explain the man with superpowers from Norway.

If the project is an older project; the red/whites are probably Denmark and Austria if it is E.U. bound and before the joining of the last countries.
It is E.U. created, in the one the second page of introductions when Sir James Braddock is talking about everyone, there are E.U signs everywhere.

I doubt it would be hard for Loki to convince anyone what he is saying is true, no matter the evidence, Just a case of changing their memories and perceptions a bit. Infact the amount of EU signs makes me think Millar got Hitch to put those in on purpose.

[Mike Smash!]

I imagine that the Gunnar talk was all illusion from Loki. Just like how Loki made Volstagg invisible to everyone else during his conversation with Thor. Notice that Gunnar walked by right before Volstagg disappeared.

I imagine that he always created some sort of illusion that got the Italian cops to attack peaceful protestors.

Now it seems the major difference between the European superheroes and the American ones, is that the Americans seem to focus on genetically altered powers and the Europeans on super-suits.

But Braddock was mentioned as a bio-engineer on par with Banner. So does that mean that Captain Britain has powers outside of the suit, too?

[Moses]

After reading it and the whole 'Loki-is-in-the-background-of-the-cafe' thing was brought to my attention, I kind of took the Italian riot as Loki making Thor halucinate/imagine that the Police were attacking the protestors, which would explain why Fury said Thor attacked the cops without provocation. Going on those lines I thought Loki had made Thor halcinate/imagine Volstagg as well, but meh, same difference.

I've got a feeling Braddock was a scientist in the regular MU as well. I REALLY hope that all of the Euro supersoldiers aren't called Captain Moldova, Captain Luxembourg etc. I hope that bit about their codename's was just Millar poking fun. It's be cool to have a european team that was actually good.

[Dizzy D]

I guess for the rest it's just what we think may as well be true, I don't think we'll see much of anyone besides Britian, Italy, Spain and France (as stated in the book they are the only ones ready). We might never see them again fro a while or they may never be named.

I think you are right. I interpreted it differently on the first reading as in the ones we see are all already ready and the 9 others are not in the picture, because we see 10 costumed people apart from Britain, Italy, Spain and France, but your answer makes more sense. I guess the guy down in the right corner is not a Captain Whatever like I thought, but one of the scientists or so? Then it would be 9 costumed guys which fits the text.

I do hope they are not all Captain Britain clones, but have their own powers.

[The Fury]

But Braddock was mentioned as a bio-engineer on par with Banner. So does that mean that Captain Britain has powers outside of the suit, too?
Are we talking James or Brian, if James then yes maybe he's done some experimenting, but by what Brian said, I'd presume he only has the power his suit gives him, (which so far seem to be flight, strength and some sort of forcefield, he was underwater with not mask or anything).

I am however questioning the other members and their powers, to create a truely dinamic team each would have their own unique ability, I do think that one or 2 may even be mutants just with a suit designed to withstand attacks.


I've got a feeling Braddock was a scientist in the regular MU as well.
Both James Braddock and Brian were/are.

I REALLY hope that all of the Euro supersoldiers aren't called Captain Moldova, Captain Luxembourg etc. I hope that bit about their codename's was just Millar poking fun. It's be cool to have a european team that was actually good.Most probably will be except the'd call themselves that just in their own languageso Captain Germany would be Kapitän Deutschland, same goes for the rest.

Although I doubt we'll have Captain Luxemburg or Moldova, at this stage anyway (Beside the fact Moldova are not part of the EU), Dizzy's list seems the most accurate yet. .

[Red State Cap]

OK, Mike. Here's my take on it and the reason I'm making this argument. After this, I'll let it drop if you guys will in the interests of civility.
You guys like Thor and the way he goes about business. Which is fine.
I like Captain America and the way he goes about business. Also fine.

My issue with you is that a) you continue to make pronouncements that Thor is morally better relative to Cap yet b) you duck honest questions that, if you were to concede the point, would in fact put Thor in a much worse light relative to Cap.
You DID state that Thor's extortion was wrong, and you DID state that you thought that it might be a bluff. However, what you did NOT answer was the fact that any delay did in fact cost lives in that situation. Look at it step-by-step. At the point that Shield gets the call (probably from the local 911 service) Hulk is merrily into his killing spree. Let's assume that the information gets kicked right up the chain to Fury. Fury activates the Ultimates he has on had, and puts in a call to Thor.
Fury: "Thor, the Hulk is cutting a wide swath through Manhatten. You can get there instantly and occupy him long enough for the rest of us to get there. You're the only one who can go toe-to-toe with the Hulk."
Thor "Well, Nick, it looks like your American Super project has really blown up in your face. Why whould I help clean up your mess?"
Fury "Because people are dying."
Thor "People are dying in thousands every day in the Third World. You Amercans could help more than you do, but you don't. (Insert anti-American, anti-capitalist diatribe here.) Tell you what, I'll help for a doubling of the international aid budgtet."
Fury "That's not in my authority."
Thor "Then find someone who can." CLICK
Note, logically speaking, even the conversation between Thor and Fury, in which Thor no doubt morally justifies himself and sets out his extortion demands, probably takes a few minutes and is in fact costing lives. It was certainly in Thor's power to be there fighting and saving lives immediately, yet he chose extortion.
Furthermore, Nick has to get hold of the President have a conversation with him, probably filling him in on the situation and giving the president his opinion that Thor is serious about his extortion -- whether he is or not, in the long run. This takes more minutes during which people are dying.
Then Fury has to call Thor back and capitulate. More time.
Therefore, whether or not Thor was -- in the long run -- bluffing is immaterial. Even if bluffing, Thor is inducing delay that is in fact costing lives. And I personally don't concede that he was bluffing, since Thor's leverage in the situation, i.e. death and destruction, is in fact mounting every second. OK, maybe his conscience gets the better of him and he shows up half an hour later after the death toll has run into the thousands and the Ultimates are all dead. Or maybe Fury calls back and tells him to go **** himself, and Thor responds "Nick, I was just kidding for Pete's sake! Be there in 5 seconds." Who knows? At that point the moral damage is done, so to speak.

What I find disconcerting, is that you cannot even address this question, much less concede that Thor was directly responsible for some percentage of the Hulk's tally, because doing so makes Thor out to be morally repugnant rather than morally upright.
That's my argument, and I'll leave it there.

RSC

[pureclint]

Cap, in both the Pym and Thor situations, was walking into a situation where no violence existed, looking for a fight in a populated area.



I still think you are looking at those situations through a taint, while he did go in search of a fight he was no as reckless as Thor was in Italy. Cap could have fought both Thor and Pym in high risk places but in both cases he did not.

With Pym (remember he did have warrant as the news reported) he brought him out to a deserted Ally adjancent to a similarly deserted Construction site.

With Thor, yes he did force his way through a bouncer (which to me is understandable he wanted to confront teamate who he thought was a traitor) yet he did not attack Thor. If he was iching for a fight with Thor as much as people think he would have HIT THor. But no, he confronted him listened to Thor's side and turned to leave.

If Thor was as a Moral Sound guy as so many portray him to be HE would have persoanlly went to his teamates and refuetted the claims and NOT ran away.

One was not innocent and needed to be brought to Justice (Would Hank have gone quietly if Cap said I am here to arrest you? that is a unkown) the other he wanted to confront him. Thor was recklace when he stopped the police. Regardless of the amount of lightning control he has he could have made a Blizzard, Rain Wind or numerous other Weather based things to stop them. He did not hvae to cause to Cars to Explode, greatly threatening not only the Protestors but the Innocent Police (they are innocent because itwas A Loki Induced Event).

[lonewolf23k]

But Braddock was mentioned as a bio-engineer on par with Banner. So does that mean that Captain Britain has powers outside of the suit, too?

It could be that, or it could be that the suit is designed to trigger biological superhuman abilities.

[Gaz]

OK, Mike. Here's my take on it and the reason I'm making this argument. After this, I'll let it drop if you guys will in the interests of civility.
You guys like Thor and the way he goes about business. Which is fine.
I like Captain America and the way he goes about business. Also fine.

My issue with you is that a) you continue to make pronouncements that Thor is morally better relative to Cap yet b) you duck honest questions that, if you were to concede the point, would in fact put Thor in a much worse light relative to Cap.
You DID state that Thor's extortion was wrong, and you DID state that you thought that it might be a bluff. However, what you did NOT answer was the fact that any delay did in fact cost lives in that situation. Look at it step-by-step. At the point that Shield gets the call (probably from the local 911 service) Hulk is merrily into his killing spree. Let's assume that the information gets kicked right up the chain to Fury. Fury activates the Ultimates he has on had, and puts in a call to Thor.
Fury: "Thor, the Hulk is cutting a wide swath through Manhatten. You can get there instantly and occupy him long enough for the rest of us to get there. You're the only one who can go toe-to-toe with the Hulk."
Thor "Well, Nick, it looks like your American Super project has really blown up in your face. Why whould I help clean up your mess?"
Fury "Because people are dying."
Thor "People are dying in thousands every day in the Third World. You Amercans could help more than you do, but you don't. (Insert anti-American, anti-capitalist diatribe here.) Tell you what, I'll help for a doubling of the international aid budgtet."
Fury "That's not in my authority."
Thor "Then find someone who can." CLICK
Note, logically speaking, even the conversation between Thor and Fury, in which Thor no doubt morally justifies himself and sets out his extortion demands, probably takes a few minutes and is in fact costing lives. It was certainly in Thor's power to be there fighting and saving lives immediately, yet he chose extortion.
Furthermore, Nick has to get hold of the President have a conversation with him, probably filling him in on the situation and giving the president his opinion that Thor is serious about his extortion -- whether he is or not, in the long run. This takes more minutes during which people are dying.
Then Fury has to call Thor back and capitulate. More time.
Therefore, whether or not Thor was -- in the long run -- bluffing is immaterial. Even if bluffing, Thor is inducing delay that is in fact costing lives. And I personally don't concede that he was bluffing, since Thor's leverage in the situation, i.e. death and destruction, is in fact mounting every second. OK, maybe his conscience gets the better of him and he shows up half an hour later after the death toll has run into the thousands and the Ultimates are all dead. Or maybe Fury calls back and tells him to go **** himself, and Thor responds "Nick, I was just kidding for Pete's sake! Be there in 5 seconds." Who knows? At that point the moral damage is done, so to speak.

What I find disconcerting, is that you cannot even address this question, much less concede that Thor was directly responsible for some percentage of the Hulk's tally, because doing so makes Thor out to be morally repugnant rather than morally upright.
That's my argument, and I'll leave it there.

RSC
I understand, and I'll drop it after this too. The number of casualties between the 2 events would be between 50 and 100, depending on how the rampage progressed. Thor is indirectly responsible for those, (if it were directly, he'd have killed them himself, to clarify) and likely feels guilty about that. He could have showed up earlier and used the goodwill from saving New York as political leverage in negotiating aid. Did he make the right call? No. Were his intentions laudable? Yes. Does that make him "repugnant"? No, just idealistic and misguided. It's worse than the Pym situation, but a similar principle. The exacerbation of a bad situation for a noble or understandable end is not acceptable. I think Thor and Cap are morally similar but have different ethics dictating their conduct.
And the recriminations would be less frequent if you debated more like this than by accusation and insinutation, thank you for this civility.

[Gaz]

I still think you are looking at those situations through a taint, while he did go in search of a fight he was no as reckless as Thor was in Italy. Cap could have fought both Thor and Pym in high risk places but in both cases he did not.

With Pym (remember he did have warrant as the news reported) he brought him out to a deserted Ally adjancent to a similarly deserted Construction site.

With Thor, yes he did force his way through a bouncer (which to me is understandable he wanted to confront teamate who he thought was a traitor) yet he did not attack Thor. If he was iching for a fight with Thor as much as people think he would have HIT THor. But no, he confronted him listened to Thor's side and turned to leave.

If Thor was as a Moral Sound guy as so many portray him to be HE would have persoanlly went to his teamates and refuetted the claims and NOT ran away.

One was not innocent and needed to be brought to Justice (Would Hank have gone quietly if Cap said I am here to arrest you? that is a unkown) the other he wanted to confront him. Thor was recklace when he stopped the police. Regardless of the amount of lightning control he has he could have made a Blizzard, Rain Wind or numerous other Weather based things to stop them. He did not hvae to cause to Cars to Explode, greatly threatening not only the Protestors but the Innocent Police (they are innocent because itwas A Loki Induced Event).
We don't know how much weather control he has, maybe he can only cause storms.

[Mike Smash!]

OK, Mike. Here's my take on it and the reason I'm making this argument. After this, I'll let it drop if you guys will in the interests of civility.
You guys like Thor and the way he goes about business. Which is fine.
I like Captain America and the way he goes about business. Also fine.

My issue with you is that a) you continue to make pronouncements that Thor is morally better relative to Cap yet b) you duck honest questions that, if you were to concede the point, would in fact put Thor in a much worse light relative to Cap.
You DID state that Thor's extortion was wrong, and you DID state that you thought that it might be a bluff. However, what you did NOT answer was the fact that any delay did in fact cost lives in that situation. Look at it step-by-step. At the point that Shield gets the call (probably from the local 911 service) Hulk is merrily into his killing spree. Let's assume that the information gets kicked right up the chain to Fury. Fury activates the Ultimates he has on had, and puts in a call to Thor.
Fury: "Thor, the Hulk is cutting a wide swath through Manhatten. You can get there instantly and occupy him long enough for the rest of us to get there. You're the only one who can go toe-to-toe with the Hulk."
Thor "Well, Nick, it looks like your American Super project has really blown up in your face. Why whould I help clean up your mess?"
Fury "Because people are dying."
Thor "People are dying in thousands every day in the Third World. You Amercans could help more than you do, but you don't. (Insert anti-American, anti-capitalist diatribe here.) Tell you what, I'll help for a doubling of the international aid budgtet."
Fury "That's not in my authority."
Thor "Then find someone who can." CLICK
Note, logically speaking, even the conversation between Thor and Fury, in which Thor no doubt morally justifies himself and sets out his extortion demands, probably takes a few minutes and is in fact costing lives. It was certainly in Thor's power to be there fighting and saving lives immediately, yet he chose extortion.
Furthermore, Nick has to get hold of the President have a conversation with him, probably filling him in on the situation and giving the president his opinion that Thor is serious about his extortion -- whether he is or not, in the long run. This takes more minutes during which people are dying.
Then Fury has to call Thor back and capitulate. More time.
Therefore, whether or not Thor was -- in the long run -- bluffing is immaterial. Even if bluffing, Thor is inducing delay that is in fact costing lives. And I personally don't concede that he was bluffing, since Thor's leverage in the situation, i.e. death and destruction, is in fact mounting every second. OK, maybe his conscience gets the better of him and he shows up half an hour later after the death toll has run into the thousands and the Ultimates are all dead. Or maybe Fury calls back and tells him to go **** himself, and Thor responds "Nick, I was just kidding for Pete's sake! Be there in 5 seconds." Who knows? At that point the moral damage is done, so to speak.

What I find disconcerting, is that you cannot even address this question, much less concede that Thor was directly responsible for some percentage of the Hulk's tally, because doing so makes Thor out to be morally repugnant rather than morally upright.
That's my argument, and I'll leave it there.

RSCFor a man who "conjecture", you wallow in it when it serves your purposes. And what *I* find disconcerting is that I have answered your questions several times over and you refuse to accept them and respond with accusation of "intellectual dishonesty" and being patronizing.

To blame Thor for the deaths in Manhattan when it serves your purpose is vague at best. Hell, even the Ultimates didn't show up until the death toll was in the triple digits and Thor likely didn't know about it until asked. The delay between Thor's set condition and his arrival was a tiny one. Probably about a minute. And in that window of time, Hulk was already fighting the team and hadn't an opportunity to kill anyone. No one died because of Thor's delay.

I'm not doing this to try to make anyone a saint or a demon, neither charge I've made of either Thor or Cap, while your posts seem to be set on making a saint of Cap and a demon of Thor.

Most of your excuses for Cap, like the statements about "prestige", being above the rules, "he got in his way", you haven't begun to explain those, nor have you admitted that Thor wasn't unrealisitic in thinking that Quicksilver was probably there to attack him. No one would argue that Pietro was there to be a diplomat. Hell, he's the biggest prick on the team.

And what you continue to repeat in this notion that I dislike Cap or think he's horrible or am about to impugn the reputation of a fictional character. That's all you, RSC.

I've backed up my reasoning for the criticisms of Cap's behavior by giving other examples of Cap being responsible with him being reckless or rude. You're the one that keeps dragging politics and "my side is better" type remarks into this debate.

And you continue to ignore that even though I think Cap acts like a prick sometimes, I put him in my top three of morally pure characters on the team.

I like Cap. I've said that several times on this thread, but you seem to be stuck in some vicarious battle where you have to prove that "your guy" is better than "my guy" and post after post, are looking for an argument where none need exist.

I like Cap and most of the time, I have problem with the way he does business. But being pissed off or having a big reputation or someone deserving it doesn't give one the right to provoke fights in public places with super people. Or to needless assault people just doing their job or kicking in a door when it doesn't need to be. Cap has on occasion seriously overplayed his hand and has never apologized for it.

And my arguments have all been based around one premise. That Captain America has on more than one occasion gone into a non-violent situation looking to hit someone, even when it could have been resolved without hitting someone. I gave specific alternatives to what else he could have done to the same ends. I also gave examples of where Cap behaved perfectly to contrast that by showing I'm not out to demonize the guy.

Of course, you as a reader know more than any of these characters and with Loki appearing in those panels, not yet intending for the readers to see him yet, you leave out the big one. That Thor was right. He didn't leak the information to the press or steal supersoldier hardware and that Cap's threats and confrontation were based on lies and hunches.

I'll look forward to seeing if Cap apologizes for his screaming at Thor when he learns that Thor is innocent.


You continue to leave out that when Thor has thus far used force, he's done so only after the situation has already become violent and he intervenes. He didn't go pick a fight with Thor cops or sneak up on Quicksilver. They all instigated the situations. Just as Cap didn't create the hostage situation or the mugging or Hulk incident.

There's a mile of difference between reacting to a violent situation against either yourself or others with force and in picking a fight yourself. This is the point that you refuse to touch.

But at this point, I really don't care. You're the one that wants to make this debate out to be "us vs. them". I'm tired of it and I'm tired of making the same points over and over again. Rea; answers aren't always the ones you want to hear and I stand my ground on this, while you obviously have a political axe to grind in this debate, so I'm done with it.

Good luck spinning for a fictional character.

[Mike Smash!]

I still think you are looking at those situations through a taint, while he did go in search of a fight he was no as reckless as Thor was in Italy. Cap could have fought both Thor and Pym in high risk places but in both cases he did not.

With Pym (remember he did have warrant as the news reported) he brought him out to a deserted Ally adjancent to a similarly deserted Construction site.

With Thor, yes he did force his way through a bouncer (which to me is understandable he wanted to confront teamate who he thought was a traitor) yet he did not attack Thor. If he was iching for a fight with Thor as much as people think he would have HIT THor. But no, he confronted him listened to Thor's side and turned to leave.

This is my last time with this, He didn't go to listen to Thor. Read the scene again. He walks in, starts insulting Thor as a sick freak and demands where the hell he gets off leaking information to the press. Cap wasn't in the mood to listen. He was going through the motions before slugging him.

It was after Thor went through a grocery list of reasons why it wasn't him and reminded Cap calmly that he was very powerful that Cap started listening. Being impatient or feeling that you're in the right is no reason to assault that bouncer.

If I had to talk to someone I was really pissed at and assaulted a security guard, I'd rightly see consequences for that, regardless of what the person I needed to talk to did. And based on Thor's calm reaction to Cap yelling at him, Cap just had to demand to come in, and I'm sure Thor would have asked him in to talk.

The reason he didn't hit Thor wasn't because he didn't want to. Thor just refused to answer his anger with anger and reminded him that "there are people bigger than Giant Man".

And like it was stated before, that Alley was still very close to the bar. Hank was still a risk to those people, especially at 60 feet. If Cap wanted to arrest Hank, he should have walked in with a smile, asked to hear his side and then sucker punched him unconscious, similarly to what he did with Banner. But Cap's goal wasn't to arrest Pym, it was to pick a fight with him. Remember, he WANTED Pym to grow for him. He wanted a superpowered fight.

Thor's actions were reaction to violent situations that already existed; had the cops not gotten out of hand with some help from Loki, Thor wouldn't have used force. Cap's were premeditated and he went to that bar with the INTENT of picking a fight. The same with Thor. He didn't want to talk. He wanted to fight him.

Okay, I'm done.

[KristyJo]

This being the Ultimate universe, i think I know how Millar is going to write Cap. Cap seems to have a knack for wanting to fight people, especially some people that would test his own limits or put up a really good fight against him. Cap usually throws himself into fights and hostile situations all the time. Is he doing this because he is a soldier and these are orders? I honestly think not. Is he doing it because he has a hair or some sort up his butt? This is closer to the answer.

CAp has lost everything. Time, family, and i believe hope. i think Cap has got a huge death wish. He has lost it in a sense. If anyone knows the sixth season of Buffy the VAmpire slayer, you know she did a lot of bad things (sleep with spike, get in insane fights) just to help her feel, because pain to her was a way of saying that she was alive. I think Cap has this same problem. The pain is makes reality seem real to him, its the only way he can feel something.

Why else would he go and sleep with wasp, awoman in the middle of a divorce? This would be something that back in Cap's time would be unheard of. i think he just lost it when he came back. If this is the way Millar is going to write him, then i say go with it. To me it explains his willingness to always go into fights and to go out and pick fights.

Any thoughts, or am i just the crazy one?

I'm sorry to interrupt this intense discussion, but I had to say thank you, jc. I cannot stand Cap and Jan together, in the thread that was deleted I believe I had a big rant about that and how they're living together and I just don't think he would do that ... I can't even tell you how much their relationship annoys me... But you have changed all that. This makes perfect sense, and it explains all the things that bother me. Maybe it helps that I watched Buffy, I don't know. But just, thanks for sharing that!

[Brian Cronin]

Honestly?

I think this has gone a good deal better than the last thread.

Obviously, some of this stretches the line of civility a bit too far, but mostly you are all keeping to putting down each other's POINTS, not each OTHER, unlike the other thread, where the line was crossed by about a mile.

So I'm fine with this, so far.

-Brian

[Gaz]

Honestly?

I think this has gone a good deal better than the last thread.

Obviously, some of this stretches the line of civility a bit too far, but mostly you are all keeping to putting down each other's POINTS, not each OTHER, unlike the other thread, where the line was crossed by about a mile.

So I'm fine with this, so far.

-Brian
We're learning from Thor,Brian. :p

[The Fury]

I do hope they are not all Captain Britain clones, but have their own powers.
As said in an earlier post, I too hope this.

Captain Italy was supposedly seen training, now if he was just running around like normal training then maybe things may have not been as bad as they are (the protests), but his powers might have to be shown in some way, speed, some type of energy projection maybe.

But yeah, I don't think we need an army of spuerstrong flying superhumans with a forcefield around them.

[StoneGold]

Just because I want to ruin this for everyone, Mike, your ideas suck, your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries.

[Red State Cap]

Kristy Jo,

Why did Cap take up with Jan? I don't even remotely agree that he has a "death wish" or a need to engage in destructive behavior to "feel."
I look at it more like this: Cap is about 6 months removed from being engaged to his highschool sweetheart, only to be frozen and wake up with most of his friends dead and his girl married to his buddy, with kids. Effectively they've lived the life that HE wanted. That is a major shock in itself.
Cap probably also feels a kind of "survivor's guilt" if you will, in the fact that he is still young, strong, and has a long life ahead of him -- if he isn't killed in battle. All his friends -- those that are left -- are at the end of their lives. So he is tremendously lonely and possibly guilt-stricken.
Cap also probably feels a bit sorry for Jan, and wants to show a relationship where a man can be good to her. Remember, he heard the whole history of Jan's relationship with Hank, which entailed pretty much her entire adult life. Seeing someone so miserable, and no one today apparently willing to do a ***-damn thing about it, probably affected him a lot.
I too find Cap's relationship with Jan to be annoying to say the least. I find Jan, as characterized, to be shallow, selfish, vain, and probably as mentally troubled as her soon-to-be-ex husband. Fortunately, issue #4 points toward a short relationship.
Although I can't stand the two of them as a couple and wish Cap would've held out for someone worthy, it's not completely unfathomable that Cap would seek comfort with the only woman today he has any kind of contact with. Who else does he know? Who else is he around? Black Widow? No, she's taken and even more unsuitable. Betsy Ross? Ha! She may be the most loathsome character in Ultimates. Wanda? Err, no!
UNfortunately, with the UU being realtively small and undeveloped as yet, there ain't a lot of potential out there for the writer to hook him up with, if you see my meaning. I doubt that Millar's going to create a character (like MU Diamondback, just for example) more suitable for Cap anytime soon. So, once Cap and Jan break up, he's probably solo for a good while. Who would you suggest, either now or in the future?

Regards,
RSC

[Brian888]

As said in an earlier post, I too jope this.

Captain Italy was supposedly seen training, now if he was just running around like normal training then maybe things may have not been as bad as they are (the protests), but his powers might have to be shown in some way, speed, some type of energy projection maybe.

But yeah, I don't think we need an army of spuerstrong flying superhumans with a forcefield around them.



Captain Italy = Ultimate Count Nefaria???

[Mike Smash!]

Kristy Jo,

Why did Cap take up with Jan? I don't even remotely agree that he has a "death wish" or a need to engage in destructive behavior to "feel."
I look at it more like this: Cap is about 6 months removed from being engaged to his highschool sweetheart, only to be frozen and wake up with most of his friends dead and his girl married to his buddy, with kids. Effectively they've lived the life that HE wanted. That is a major shock in itself.
Cap probably also feels a kind of "survivor's guilt" if you will, in the fact that he is still young, strong, and has a long life ahead of him -- if he isn't killed in battle. All his friends -- those that are left -- are at the end of their lives. So he is tremendously lonely and possibly guilt-stricken.
Cap also probably feels a bit sorry for Jan, and wants to show a relationship where a man can be good to her. Remember, he heard the whole history of Jan's relationship with Hank, which entailed pretty much her entire adult life. Seeing someone so miserable, and no one today apparently willing to do a ***-damn thing about it, probably affected him a lot.
I too find Cap's relationship with Jan to be annoying to say the least. I find Jan, as characterized, to be shallow, selfish, vain, and probably as mentally troubled as her soon-to-be-ex husband. Fortunately, issue #4 points toward a short relationship.
Although I can't stand the two of them as a couple and wish C