THE TRINITY: Moral choices, ethical division & killing *SPOILERS*

[JeffreyWKramer]

A few minor corrections...

Remember when J'onn talked about the mental barriers that Clark errected to keep himself from ever killing? This is the reason. It wasn't right, it was vengence, pure and simple. You could arguably say he needed to make sure they could never get off Pocket Earth, but that's not why Clark did it.

Not quite. He did need to make sure they didn't get off pocket earth. The problem is, he set himself up as judge, jury and executioner. He took the weight of the entire decision on himself, and unlike Wonder Woman, Superman has moral compunctions against killing.

Wasn't it a rather large part of Busiek's portrayal of Carol that she was a deeply flawed person?

Not really, though it was sort of a test of whether her companions had come to view her as having recovered from her earlier, unstable period. And they had. There was a tribunal regarding her actions, and she was cleared of wrongdoing.

[Yoda]

Max could not have broken out of his restraints, his powers didn't work on her and in a fight Diana could tear him in half. And it was only through crappy writing that she didn't immediately telepathically call for help.
Actually she could not call for telepathic help. J'onn was imprisoned in the teleportation loop at the time. She was on her own.

Or maybe just kill *all* heroes, after all, they're all going to turn evil/be brainwashed or something in the future, right? That's happened to just about every hero on Earth at least once before.
Slipperly Slope arguments are fairly weak in any debate.

[Tom]

Max could not have broken out of his restraints, his powers didn't work on her and in a fight Diana could tear him in half. And it was only through crappy writing that she didn't immediately telepathically call for help.Wasn't J'Onn stuck in a teleporter loop? And no, Max's powers don't work on her, just on the most powerful person on the planet, who just tried to kill her, just tried to kill her teammate, and is standing right next to her.


As Jeff said, Max took years to build the metaphoric gun, but any other telepath could've come along later and pulled the trigger.There's still nothing in the story to make that leap of logic.

[Peter]

Actually she could not call for telepathic help. J'onn was imprisoned in the teleportation loop at the time. She was on her own.

Max thinks at 100 ms. Diana can move at speeds approaching 300,000,000 ms. And she knows about four or five other people who can also move that fast.

She was not alone.


Slipperly Slope arguments are fairly weak in any debate.

Because, after killing Luthor in "Better World pt 1", Superman didn't become a Justice Lord.

Oh, hang on a minute...

[Yoda]

And Batman went out of his way to create OMAC or Brother 1 or whatever.

So why aren't you arguing that we should kill him, too?
Brother I was only created to observe meta's. It was Max that altered it and added the OMAC's. So no, Batman does not share Max's level of culpability and therefore we should not kill him.

[Sk8maven]

As Jeff said, Max took years to build the metaphoric gun, but any other telepath could've come along later and pulled the trigger.

So therefore, going on this logic, we must kill Superman. For everybody's safety. Or maybe just kill *all* heroes, after all, they're all going to turn evil/be brainwashed or something in the future, right? That's happened to just about every hero on Earth at least once before.You KNOW DC's going to find a way to have the booby-traps in Supes' mind safely disarmed - they'll HAVE TO, because the only other alternative IS to kill him.

But when they do that, they will be tacitly admitting that it WAS NOT necessary to kill Max Lord.

Diana made a decision based on Best Available Data - and I hope some writer at DC has the intelligence to notice that it's still B.A.D.

No, they don't have Max Lord to worry about (for now) - but they DO have a vengeful Brother I and a bazillion OMACs, all of whom think that ALL "metahumans" are an imminent and deadly threat to the human race and must be destroyed. Talk about "out of the frying pan and into the fire"!

Maven

[JeffreyWKramer]

Arguably the Phantom Zone may still qualify as keeping him "alive" and imprisoned - I'm not really sure how the Phantom Zone works at this moment in Superman's continuity -but if you are going to freeze him in time forever, or lobotmize him or completely mind wipe him to the point where you're rewriting him mentaly ala Dr. Light how are any of those options any differant than killing him?

No need to lobotomize him. Sedate or Zone him for a bit, sort out options, remove his powers permanently, incarcerate him somewhere as secure as possible (Atlantis or New Genesis, perhaps) to prevent his dangerous knowledge from being accessed by any but the most powerful villains (most of whom either already have such knowledge, or could obtain it fairly easily). No death necessary.

[thetube]

Max was a menace and would have used Supes to kill her in an instant. It was justified.

[Yoda]

Because, after killing Luthor in "Better World pt 1", Superman didn't become a Justice Lord.

Oh, hang on a minute...
You can "slipperly slope" your way from any point to any conclusion. My eating this chip could be lead to genocide....

It's a weak argument at best.

[Peter]

Wasn't J'Onn stuck in a teleporter loop?

Already answered. Given her ridiculous speed, she could've found some other Leaguers the old fashioned way.

And no, Max's powers don't work on her, just on the most powerful person on the planet, who just tried to kill her, just tried to kill her teammate, and is standing right next to her.

Who is now free from Max's control, and who could race over to the Fortress, grab the Phantom Zone Gun, and race back -- all in the tiny attosecond before Max can fire one nervous synapse. Hell, Diana could do this too.


There's still nothing in the story to make that leap of logic.

Why? Because only Max can reach said trigger? As stated, the guy's only B-level, and saying that A-level telepathic villain (of which there are several) would have trouble finding or activating said trigger is nonsensical.

[Smarty Jones]

"Although I grant you that Captain America did snap Blood's neck, again I think the mitigating factor is that Blood was long dead. I'm trying to think about what would happen if Vampires existed in real life, and I doubt that people killing them would be considered a big deal. Again, I can't remember anywhere where the death of a vampire was considered murder. Perhaps we need a constitutional amendment allowing equal rights for the Undead? (joke!)

You're playing semantics with vampires. They're sentient beings who still can live and ultimately be killed. They're human beings transformed into a semi-state of a demonic type of life. It's not like a zombie, which in comic book sense are considered dead and incapable of sentient thought.

"Well, again, I said I wasn't sure about this one, but the way you describe (Colossus killing Proteus), the more it sounds like self-defense to me..."

I apologize if my naration led you to that conclusionm but it's the same situation as what's going on here. Colossus knew the only way to stop Proteus was to kill him. Like Wonder Woman, there was no viable option for Colossus. The X-Man lured him into a trap and used his ability to turn into organic metal to kill him.

[JeffreyWKramer]

There's still nothing in the story to make that leap of logic.

Actually, it's a completely logical conclusion from what we were told in-story. Max programmed Superman via telepathy. The program is in his mind as a telepathic construct - J'onn was able to detect it in the ADVENTURES OF SUPERMAN sequence of Sacrifice. If J'onn can find it, and a B-rate telepath like Max could put it there in the first place, it's logical to assume that other powerful telepaths could both detect and access the program.

[Peter]

My eating this chip could be lead to genocide....

If you've eaten a chip before and it's lead to genocide, it would be a weak argument, yes.

And my response -- for the love of Animus, don't eat that chip ;).

[Peter]

You're playing semantics with vampires. They're sentient beings who still can live...

Dude, the point to being a vampire is you are intrinsically evil, and *not* alive.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Max was a menace and would have used Supes to kill her in an instant. It was justified.

He didn't have an instant. Superman was free of his control and he was bound and in Wonder Woman's grasp - she could have knocked him out at several times the speed of human thought in equal or less time than it took her to break his neck.

[Z-man]

I apologize if my naration led you to that conclusionm but it's the same situation as what's going on here. Colossus knew the only way to stop Proteus was to kill him. Like Wonder Woman, there was no viable option for Colossus. The X-Man lured him into a trap and used his ability to turn into organic metal to kill him.

Re: the underlined portion. Have you not been paying attention this whole arguement? Just because you SAY there was no viable option does not make it true.

[Yoda]

Just because you SAY there was no viable option does not make it true.
And just because you say there was a viable option does not make it true either.

[Peter]

He didn't have an instant. Superman was free of his control and he was bound and in Wonder Woman's grasp - she could have knocked him out at several times the speed of human thought in equal or less time than it took her to break his neck.

Exactly.

Ignoring Superman, ignoring J'Onn and allies and resources and the new gods and the Spectre and ignoring everything else in the Universe...

...Diana could *still* have subdued him with her ridiculous skill advantage, without killing him.

[JeffreyWKramer]

[QUOTE=Smarty Jones]You're playing semantics with vampires. They're sentient beings who still can live and ultimately be killed. They're human beings transformed into a semi-state of a demonic type of life. It's not like a zombie, which in comic book sense are considered dead and incapable of sentient thought.

Even Superman and Batman kill vampires with impunity - they did so most recently in that awful JLA arc with Crucifer. Vampires aren't alive by the definitions of life used in the DCU.

[Peter]

And just because you say there was a viable option does not make it true either.

So...

...all those posts where Jeff, Z and myself list viable alternatives (other valid options), you obviously didn't read them? I listed six in one post, after all.

[Sk8maven]

Actually she could not call for telepathic help. J'onn was imprisoned in the teleportation loop at the time. She was on her own.The last time I looked, J'Onn was NOT the only telepath in the DCU - not even the only one on the side of good. There's Di's old buddy Arthur (Aquaman), who should be sensitive to her wavelength precisely because of the long time they've worked together. There's Hank King, Jr (Brainwave), who's just been hauled back over to the side of "the good guys". There are others I can't think of off the top of my head. And they can't ALL be busy with one or another crisis, can they? Doesn't the story start to seem a bit more artificial if they are?

Slippery Slope arguments are fairly weak in any debate.That's why DC never uses them - oh right, they DO, with considerable frequency. Especially with regard to Green Lanterns.

Maven

[JeffreyWKramer]

And just because you say there was a viable option does not make it true either.

Except we've been given no reason why these options are not truly viable. In contrast, Wonder Woman's speed and the circumstances depicted make it quite obvious Wonder Woman could have done something else at that moment it took to kill Max - i.e., KO'd him. Then she could have considered and pursued other options at relative leisure.

[Tom]

Actually, it's a completely logical conclusion from what we were told in-story. Max programmed Superman via telepathy. The program is in his mind as a telepathic construct - J'onn was able to detect it in the ADVENTURES OF SUPERMAN sequence of Sacrifice. If J'onn can find it, and a B-rate telepath like Max could put it there in the first place, it's logical to assume that other powerful telepaths could both detect and access the program.
J'Onn's arguably one of the most powerful telepaths in the DCU and he couldn't affect the construct in any way. It's a read-only file.

[Smarty Jones]

"And Batman went out of his way to create OMAC or Brother 1 or whatever.

So why aren't you arguing that we should kill him, too?"

That's flawed logic, which is beneath you. Batman created Brother Eye to monitor superheroes' actions in light of "Identity Crisis."

Maxwell Lord overtook Batman's original plan, corrupted Brother Eye for his own agenda of taking out superheroes and showed an ability to kill said superheroes.

That's as logical as saying a parent also should get the gas chamber for his or her child murdering someone. Batman's intent wasn't to participate in mass murder, nor did he help Lord in such incident.

[Z-man]

And just because you say there was a viable option does not make it true either.

Which is where the ability to defend your points of view comes in so handy, such as by listing and supporting viable alternatives.

[Yoda]

Even Superman and Batman kill vampires with impunity - they did so most recently in that awful JLA arc with Crucifer. Vampires aren't alive by the definitions of life used in the DCU.
Do you really want to use that horrible Bryne & Claremont arc to justify your argument? Comeon, if anything thats got to detract from any point you were trying to make ;)

[Sabrinaset]

Other non-lethal, but painful, ways Wonder Woman could have dealt with Max:

Stuff high school cafeteria food down his throat. He'll be too sick to use his powers.
Exile him to France. No intelligent life there to control. Even if he does try to organize an army, it'll surrender every time.
Teleport him to the 31st century with the LSH. He'll be retconned beyond recognition about 12 dozen times. A month.
Get Russell Crowe to throw phones at him until he becomes brain-damaged.
At super-speed, rush him in front of Sean Penn. Tell Sean that Max is a paparazzi.
Place him in front of Mike Tyson just before dinnertime.
Grab Tony Starks Image Inducer. Make Max look like Jessica Simpson. Drop him off at Iron Heights.

[Z-man]

J'Onn's arguably one of the most powerful telepaths in the DCU and he couldn't affect the construct in any way. It's a read-only file.

J'onn wasn't trying to activate it, he was trying to get rid of it.

[JeffreyWKramer]

J'Onn's arguably one of the most powerful telepaths in the DCU and he couldn't affect the construct in any way. It's a read-only file.

a) J'Onn never said he couldn't affect it in any way. He said only he couldn't remove it without damaging Superman. I have no doubt he could have triggered the program, had he wished to do so, but obviously that would be the last thing J'Onn would wish to do. In contrast, I imagine someone like Grodd or Despero would find the idea amazingly cool.

b) Just as a superior programmer can hack into a system/program set up by an inferior one, it's entirely logical that a telepath superior to Max - and I've named several in this thread - could do the same to Max's telepathic programming.

[Smarty Jones]

"Dude, the point to being a vampire is you are intrinsically evil, and *not* alive."

I'll tell Blade, Hannibal King and Moebius.

You're obviously missing the point here -- Captain America had to make a decision that forced him to make lethal force, lest the lives of others would be impacted adversely.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Do you really want to use that horrible Bryne & Claremont arc to justify your argument? Comeon, if anything thats got to detract from any point you were trying to make ;)

If this were only shown in the Crucifer story, I'd probably concede the point, but there have been other stories set in the DCU in which Superman, Batman and others demonstrated no compunctions against killing vampires. The same has been shown in the Marvel U, which is relevant to Shorty's arguments re: Cap and Baron Blood. The X-Men, Dr. Strange and others have demonstrated a willingness to destroy vampires via lethal force. Indeed, Cap has demonstrated much less willingness than most heroes, but then, Cap is among the most moral of all heroes.

[DracoMalfoy]

My two cents. I find it disheartening that the only way to up Wonder Woman's readership was for her to kill someone. Unfortunately that will probably be her staple for the less informed of Diana of Themyscira.

Loved the issue though.

[Z-man]

I'll tell Blade, Hannibal King and Moebius.

You mean the three special cases? That's a long way from proving your point.

[Smarty Jones]

"Re: the underlined portion. Have you not been paying attention this whole arguement? Just because you SAY there was no viable option does not make it true."

And conversely, just because you're playing Monday morning quarterback doesn't mean what you say is true. Maxwell Lord was a rabid dog that still was dangerous.

Really, did he lose his mental powers? Could he no longer control Superman when he wanted to? Did he swear on the Boy Scout book to cross his heart and never tell a lie, and if he did he hoped to die?

No. He was still a rabid dog who was a worldwide threat -- one who made it clear he had no problems doing it again and only stopped because he wanted to. He was too far gone.

[Sabrinaset]

Do you really want to use that horrible Bryne & Claremont arc to justify your argument? Comeon, if anything thats got to detract from any point you were trying to make ;)

How about the Byrne/Arthur Adams issue where they both run into a town overrun by Vampires?
Maaaan, I'm poring over my husbands comic collection right now because of this thread hehe this is so cool!

[Smarty Jones]

"If this were only shown in the Crucifer story, I'd probably concede the point, but there have been other stories set in the DCU in which Superman, Batman and others demonstrated no compunctions against killing vampires. The same has been shown in the Marvel U, which is relevant to Shorty's arguments re: Cap and Baron Blood. The X-Men, Dr. Strange and others have demonstrated a willingness to destroy vampires via lethal force. Indeed, Cap has demonstrated much less willingness than most heroes, but then, Cap is among the most moral of all heroes."

OK, not even taking into consideration that the vast majority of vampires in comic books have appeared in Marvel and most of the ones Superman and Batman took out were minor characters and/or obligatory cannon fodder (and combustible cannon fodder at that) ...

The concept in which I spoke remains the same. Cap put down an evil villain that left him no other choice but to kill him. I'm sure Cap could have come up with other alternatives to eliminating the threat of Baron Blood like he did in the old days of The Invaders, but this was a threat that too far out there for garlic water.

P.S. The name is "Smarty."

[Z-man]

And conversely, just because you're playing Monday morning quarterback doesn't mean what you say is true. Maxwell Lord was a rabid dog that still was dangerous.

Really, did he lose his mental powers? Could he no longer control Superman when he wanted to? Did he swear on the Boy Scout book to cross his and never tell a lie, and if he did he hoped to die?

No. He was still a rabid dog who was a worldwide threat -- one who made it clear he had no problems doing it again and only stopped because he wanted to. He was too far gone.

Did Wonder Woman lose her superior strength and speed? Did the Phantom Zone projector break down? Was Max not incapacitated and did he not let Superman go for long enough that she could snap his neck, or use that same time to knock him unconscious?

No. She still had other options and could have stopped him without killing him before he did serious harm for at least long enough to consider her options and decide that killing was the right option.

[JeffreyWKramer]

And conversely, just because you're playing Monday morning quarterback doesn't mean what you say is true.
Smarty, please demonstrate then how the logic Peter, myself and others have shown is faulty. All youre saying is "no, he was still dangerous." Yes, he was, potentially, but at that moment, he was neutralized. Thus, there was no imminent threat, and there were lots of options for dealing with the long-term potential threat.

Presumably Max could not have reactivated Superman's programming in the time it would have taken WW to KO him, because he didn't do so in the time it took her to kill him, and given her speed, she could do either in approximately the same (extremely minimal) amount of time.

Rather than say the same thing over and over, demonstrate - if you can - what is faulty about the arguments I and others have been making as to her available options.

[JeffreyWKramer]

How about the Byrne/Arthur Adams issue where they both run into a town overrun by Vampires?

Yep, that's one of the ones I was thinking about earlier.

[JeffreyWKramer]

P.S. The name is "Smarty."[/color][/font]
Sorry about that. Not sure at the moment if that error was a typo or a brain fart, but either way, my apologies.

[Smarty Jones]

"Did Wonder Woman lose her superior strength and speed? Did the Phantom Zone projector break down? Was Max not incapacitated and did he not let Superman go for long enough that she could snap his neck, or use that same time to knock him unconscious?

No. She still had other options and could have stopped him without killing him before he did serious harm for at least long enough to consider her options and decide that killing was the right option."

So in other words, it would have been cool for you to have Wonder Woman take Maxwell Lord to the Watchtower, cool his heels in a cell and then she decides a few days later, "Oh, hell. I'll just go in there and kill him."

Lord was too dangerous, did not lose his powers and influence on Superman and still has access to OMAC and Checkmate. I saw or read nothing in their exchange that suggested, "Hey, I'm quitting the villain game and I'll never bother you all again."

I think the reason some of you all are upset with this is not the fact that Maxwell Lord is dead (I cannot see anyone feeling sorry for him), but for the fact who killed him -- Wonder Woman.

[Z-man]

OK, not even taking into consideration that the vast majority of vampires in comic books have appeared in Marvel and most of the ones Superman and Batman took out were minor characters and/or obligatory cannon fodder (and combustible cannon fodder at that) ...

The concept in which I spoke remains the same. Cap put down an evil villain that left him no other choice but to kill him. I'm sure Cap could have come up with other alternatives to eliminating the threat of Baron Blood like he did in the old days of The Invaders, but this was a threat that too far out there for garlic water.

Have really moved so far away from the arguement that this is relevant?

He was a vampire, vampires are already dead and thus nobody has a problem with killing them. Not Captain America, not Batman, not Superman, not any of the people you are trying to show up with this arguement. The situation is simple, Cap killed a vampire. Maxwell Lord is not a vampire and thus in a different moral place. Show me where Maxwell Lord lacks a soul, has to kill to survive, or gets any other of the "gimmes" that vampires get.

[Z-man]

So in other words, it would have been cool for you to have Wonder Woman take Maxwell Lord to the Watchtower, cool his heels in a cell and then she decides a few days later, "Oh, hell. I'll just go in there and kill him."

No, in other words, it would have been cool for me to have Wonder Woman take Maxwell Lord to the Watchtower, discuss the issue with the others present, consider the options available to them, and then say "There's no other option, we do need to kill him."

Lord was too dangerous, did not lose his powers and influence on Superman and still has access to OMAC and Checkmate. I saw or read nothing in their exchange that suggested, "Hey, I'm quitting the villain game and I'll never bother you all again."

I saw or read nothing in any comic to suggest that they couldn't take all of these things from him by force. Do you really not get that Maxwell Lord's cooperation is not neccessary in this scenario?

I think the reason some of you all are upset with this is not the fact that Maxwell Lord is dead (I cannot see anyone feeling sorry for him), but for the fact who killed him -- Wonder Woman.

Wow. It's almost like you've been reading the arguements of your opponents.

[jeanpaulB.]

And conversely, just because you're playing Monday morning quarterback doesn't mean what you say is true. Maxwell Lord was a rabid dog that still was dangerous.

Really, did he lose his mental powers? Could he no longer control Superman when he wanted to? Did he swear on the Boy Scout book to cross his and never tell a lie, and if he did he hoped to die?

No. He was still a rabid dog who was a worldwide threat -- one who made it clear he had no problems doing it again and only stopped because he wanted to. He was too far gone.


MAX'S ASS HAD TO GO. I FIND IT INTERESTING THAT SHE HAD A CHOICE AND THE CHOICE THAT SHE PERSUED WOULD MAKE PEOPLE SO UNCOMFORTABLE. MAYBE IT IS MY POST 911 VIEW, BUT MAX PROVED TO BEE A THREAT BY THE ABILITY TO CONTROL SUCH A WEAPON AS SUPERMAN. GIVEN THAT, (MORE POWERFUL THAN TEN NUCLEAR BOMBS, THERE SHOULD BE A PROBLEM WITH DIANA'S CHOICE.

I WOULD NOT HESITATE TO KILL HIM IN A MINUTE IF I WERE IN THE SAME POSITION. MAX HAD THE ABILITY TO CONTROL ALMOST ANYONE, THEREBY MAKING HIM ARGUABLY THE MOST DANGEROUS MAN ON EARTH. GIVEN THAT HE HAD A GOAL OF DESTROYING ALL META, AND ENHANSED BEINGS, HE NEEDED TO DIE. THOSE OF YOU WHO ARGUE THAT SHE HAD ALTERNATIVES, ARE THE SAME PEOPLE WHO HOPE THAT THE PREZ FOUND OSAMA AND OFFED HIM. THINK ABOUT IT, AND IF YOU ARE TO TRULY SEARCH YOUR FEELINGS, YOU KNOW THIS TO BE TRUE.

I KNOW I DO! DIANA, IS AM AMAZON, AND HERE, SHE SHOWED THAT, AND REAMINS TRUE TO HERSELF. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT PEREZ ESTABLISHED INT HIS RUN OF THE BOOK! IN THE EARLY ISSUES, DIANA KILLED MONSTERS LIKE DECAY AND TWICE SHE SLAYED THE GORGON. MAZ WAS A MONSTER : ONE IN HUMAN GUISE, BUT MONSTER NONTHELESS.

THE LEAGUERS SHOULD REALIZE THAT , AND IF THEY CANNOT,,,,,OH WELLL. SUPERMAN, WOULD NOT HAVE HAD THE BALLS TO DO IT, AND ON ONE OCCASION I CAN THINK OF HE DID THE SAME THING ON AN ALTERNATE EARTH. SO THE THE HELL IS HE TO JUDGE!???!

[Sabrinaset]

Smarty, I'm just going to have to agree to disagree with you on the vampire thing. Now, if Baron Blood had been Batroc the Leaper, okay, you'd have a point, but ... I guess in D&D terms (I think), killing a vampire costs you zero karma points!
I don't think we'd be having this argument if Wonder Woman had killed Mr. Immortal :)
And, c'mon guys, I put a lot of work into my post of other ways to incapacitate Max! Someone comment on it :)

[Smarty Jones]

"Smarty, please demonstrate then how the logic Peter, myself and others have shown is faulty. All youre saying is "no, he was still dangerous." Yes, he was, potentially, but at that moment, he was neutralized. Thus, there was no imminent threat, and there were lots of options for dealing with the long-term potential threat.

Presumably Max could not have reactivated Superman's programming in the time it would have taken WW to KO him, because he didn't do so in the time it took her to kill him, and given her speed, she could do either in approximately the same (extremely minimal) amount of time.

Rather than say the same thing over and over, demonstrate - if you can - what is faulty about the arguments I and others have been making as to her available options."

The problem is your argument is based on a lot of presumptions.

PRESUMABLY Maxwell Lord swore on the Boy Scout book and would not attack The JLA once they captured him (something he never stated and in fact galled Wonder Woman into believing he would do it again).

PRESUMABLY Lord could not activate Superman again quickly (unfounded, because it's not based on anything).

Your leap of faith -- based in no part on the fictional Superhero Comic Book Code -- is way too much for a character who was extremely dangerous and showed no obvious sign of being an eliminated threat.

Taking Lord to The Watchtower was inviting danger, because he would have had his choice of superheroes to eliminate. Hell, look at the damage OMAC is raising AFTER Lord's death.

Those other alternatives are too faulty and have been proven to backfire (The Phantom Zone, mental alteration, etc.). Maxwell Lord was a rabid dog, and when a rabid dog gets loose -- you kill it.

[Z-man]

The problem is your argument is based on a lot of presumptions.

PRESUMABLY Maxwell Lord swore on the Boy Scout book and would not attack The JLA once they captured him (something he never stated and in fact galled Wonder Woman into believing he would do it again).

PRESUMABLY Lord could not activate Superman again quickly (unfounded, because it's not based on anything).

PRESUMABLY either of these two points are relevant

PRESUMABLY Maxwell was so powerful and unstoppable that only he could stop himself. After all, if he didn't swear on the boy Scout book not to attack the JLA, it's not like the most powerful people on Earth could stop him. It's not like they can access such drugs that Maxwell Lord doesn't get to wake up until after a decision has been made.

[JeffreyWKramer]

The problem is your argument is based on a lot of presumptions.

PRESUMABLY Maxwell Lord swore on the Boy Scout book and would not attack The JLA once they captured him (something he never stated and in fact galled Wonder Woman into believing he would do it again).

How could he do so if he was sedated, or in the Phantom Zone, or magically kept unconscious?

PRESUMABLY Lord could not activate Superman again quickly (unfounded, because it's not based on anything).

He didn't activate Superman in response to Wonder Woman breaking his neck, so this seems a pretty well-supported assumption to me.

Taking Lord to The Watchtower was inviting danger, because he would have had his choice of superheroes to eliminate. Hell, look at the damage OMAC is raising AFTER Lord's death.

Again, how dangerous could he be if he was unconscious and kept that way? The Watchtower infirmary has sedatives, you know. Or they can just have one of the GLs put him in indefinite stasis. Or off to the Phantom Zone. Or Wally slows him down to the point of suspended animation.

[Smarty Jones]

"No, in other words, it would have been cool for me to have Wonder Woman take Maxwell Lord to the Watchtower, discuss the issue with the others present, consider the options available to them, and then say 'There's no other option, we do need to kill him.'"

OH, I get it! If Wonder Woman does it while Maxwell Lord is a clear and present danger, it was wrong to kill him.

But after being detained for a while and several people decided to come to the same conclusion as she did -- including some people who likely were not part of the situation -- THEN it's OK to kill him.

You ask me, the second scenario sounds like PREMEDITATED MURDER, because then The JLA made a planned effort to kill Lord after cooler heads prevailed. Say what you want, Wonder Woman didn't decide way in advance that she was going to kill Lord.

"I saw or read nothing in any comic to suggest that they couldn't take all of these things from him by force. Do you really not get that Maxwell Lord's cooperation is not neccessary in this scenario?"

Maybe you got a different book than I did, but Maxwell Lord still had his abilities (and the ability to control SUPERMAN), still had his resources and was at his base when he was confronted by Wonder Woman.

ADVANTAGE: Maxwell Lord. A rabid dog in his back yard.

"Wow. It's almost like you've been reading the arguements of your opponents."

And you keep it up and I'll start treating you like a 15-year-old. Maybe you ought to read my arguments.

[Smarty Jones]

"How could he do so IF he was sedated, or in the Phantom Zone, or magically kept unconscious?"

Again, presuming a lot of things -- based on old superhero codes.

"He didn't activate Superman in response to Wonder Woman breaking his neck, so this seems a pretty well-supported assumption to me."

Given this is Wonder Woman, Diana could break a person's neck faster than the person can think about preventing.

"Again, how dangerous could he be if he was unconscious and kept that way? The Watchtower infirmary has sedatives, you know. Or they can just have one of the GLs put him in indefinite stasis. Or off to the Phantom Zone. Or Wally slows him down to the point of suspended animation."

Again, it's Monday morning quarterbacking. IF The JLA did this, The Flash COULD HAVE done that, etc. It's based on contingencies you preferred to happen, based in part on how things were done in the Silver Ages. Basically, rationalized speculation.

Again, Maxwell Lord was no different than Proteus, Baron Blood, the Kryptonians and The Master -- their existence made the world a dangerous place in which to live, and there was no reconciliation beyond ending that existence. Lord was too dangerous to live, because he could not be controlled.

[Z-man]

OH, I get it! If Wonder Woman does it while Maxwell Lord is a clear and present danger, it was wrong to kill him.

But after being detained for a while and several people decided to come to the same conclusion as she did -- including some people who likely were not part of the situation -- THEN it's OK to kill him.

You ask me, the second scenario sounds like PREMEDITATED MURDER, because then The JLA made a planned effort to kill Lord after cooler heads prevailed. Say what you want, Wonder Woman didn't decide way in advance that she was going to kill Lord.

If Wonder Woman had done it while Maxwell Lord was a clear and present danger, this would be an entirely different arguement. Maxwell Lord was bound by her ropes, not doing anything to defend himself, and was, by virtue of evidence directly from the book, weak enough that Wonder Woman could deliver a blow on him powerful enough to render him unconscious so that he can't use his mind powers long enough so that she can take him away from the resources that you find so threatening.

Hey, I thought you were the one so keen on doing what they have to do. By saying that they don't have to do it if they consider their options, that's the same as admitting that it didn't need to be done. See, on the scenario we got, Wonder Woman is simply bloodlusted and killing him because she wants to, whereas in my scenario Wonder Woman is simply doing what needs to be done.

Maybe you got a different book than I did, but Maxwell Lord still had his abilities (and the ability to control SUPERMAN), still had his resources and was at his base when he was confronted by Wonder Woman.

ADVANTAGE: Maxwell Lord. A rabid dog in his back yard.

In the book I got, Maxwell Lord was bound in an unbreakable lasso, and unable to defend himself while she delivered a blow. The difference is that, if it were a non-fatal blow to knock him out, he would have been unable to use his abilities (and the ability to control SUPERMAN) and she could have taken him away from his resources and his base long enough to at least consider the alternatives.

[DracoMalfoy]

Whether or not Diana is wrong about killing Maxwell Lord, I personally don't understand why some people are either surprised or disgusted with her actions concerning Maxwell Lord. She's killed before. Many times. It's in her nature. If she feels no other peaceful options are available then someone's head is getting chopped off.

I don't understand why some people are opposed to the idea of WW killing someone.

[Z-man]

Given this is Wonder Woman, Diana could break a person's neck faster than the person can think about preventing.[/color]

She can also deliver a nonfatal blow capable of knocking somebody out faster than the person can think about preventing it.

In fact, it would have taken only one panel instead of the three panels we got.

[Smarty Jones]

"Whether or not Diana is wrong about killing Maxwell Lord, I personally don't understand why some people are either surprised or disgusted with her actions concerning Maxwell Lord. She's killed before. Many times. It's in her nature. If she feels no other peaceful options are available then someone's head is getting chopped off.

I don't understand why some people are opposed to the idea of WW killing someone."

Easy, because it's Wonder Woman -- The Amazon Princess who is most readers' ideal female superhero (beautiful, virtuous, independent and stately).

People would not feel this way if the name was Wolverine, The Punisher or The Midnighter, but to some Wonder Woman is an iconic figure who should not be sullied. Yes, Diana has killed before. But usually, it was in a somewhat clinical fashion and not a character with which readers are somewhat familiar.

But now, an icon of an innocence in the concept of superheroes has gone down the path of "an eye for an eye."

I'm sorry, but Maxwell Lord's ass had to die. He was too dangerous to live and could not be controlled. By sitting around and doing the talking heads thing like Z-man suggested, you're letting a rabid dog catch its second breath. Taking him to The Watchtower and letting him chill -- KNOWING he still could control Superman -- just sounds ridiculous and reckless to me.

My problem with some of the logic is that they are acting like Wonder Woman woke up that day and said, "I'm going to kill Maxwell Lord today." Lord started a war, and by virtue of that war he died. Pretty simple, if you ask me.

[Sabrinaset]

Easy, because it's Wonder Woman -- The Amazon Princess who is most readers ideal of the female superhero (beautiful, virtuous, independent and stately).

People would not feel this way if the name was Wolverine, The Punisher or The Midnighter, but to some Wonder Woman is an iconic figure who should not be sullied. Yes, Diana has killed before. But usually, it was in a somewhat clinical fashion and not a character with which readers are somewhat familiar.

But now, an icon of an innocence in the concept of superheroes has gone down the path of "an eye for an eye."

From what I've read of them, Wolverine, Punisher, and Midnighter are closer to serial killers than super-heroes. I understand that it sells, but...

Again, Smarty, I understand your points and respect your opinion, I know where you're coming from, and you've explained your position well, but I'm afraid I'm just going to have to agree to disagree with them. I feel that heroes should do whatever it takes to set a higher standard, and lately, it seems to me that DC has taken a philosophy similar to "The ends justify the means."
I mean, in the JLAvengers crossover, Superman criticizes the Marvel heroes because they don't do enough to inspire the people there. Anyone see the irony here, because lately, save for the Flash, I don't feel too inspired by DC.

[Smarty Jones]

"I WOULD NOT HESITATE TO KILL HIM IN A MINUTE IF I WERE IN THE SAME POSITION. MAX HAD THE ABILITY TO CONTROL ALMOST ANYONE, THEREBY MAKING HIM ARGUABLY THE MOST DANGEROUS MAN ON EARTH. GIVEN THAT HE HAD A GOAL OF DESTROYING ALL META, AND ENHANSED BEINGS, HE NEEDED TO DIE. THOSE OF YOU WHO ARGUE THAT SHE HAD ALTERNATIVES, ARE THE SAME PEOPLE WHO HOPE THAT THE PREZ FOUND OSAMA AND OFFED HIM. THINK ABOUT IT, AND IF YOU ARE TO TRULY SEARCH YOUR FEELINGS, YOU KNOW THIS TO BE TRUE. "

I'll play devil's advocate again, and use a real-life situation. What if Adolf Hitler was captured in battle, or even before he commited suicide? Here was an enemy who was too evil and far gone and undoubtedly too dangerous to be kept alive. His presence made the world a more dangerous place to live.

What would you all do with him?

[Guts/Batman]

My personal opinion (if not stated here then on the OMAC thread) is that she did in fact do what was necessary at the time. Will it come back to haunt them? Knowing the nature of fiction in general, yes it will.

But I would put WW in the warrior class rather than the hero class. And once on the battle field warriors kill (well, most of the time).

[Smarty Jones]

"From what I've read of them, Wolverine, Punisher, and Midnighter are closer to serial killers than super-heroes. I understand that it sells, but...

Again, Smarty, I understand your points and respect your opinion, I know where you're coming from, and you've explained your position well, but I'm afraid I'm just going to have to agree to disagree with them. I feel that heroes should do whatever it takes to set a higher standard, and lately, it seems to me that DC has taken a philosophy similar to "The ends justify the means."

I'm not disagreeing with your stance about superheroes being shown on a moral high road -- I was especially disgusted by the events in "Identity Crisis" -- but I don't quite see what Wonder Woman did as nearly as reprehensible as some people are making it out to be.

I see what Diana did as what Captain America, Superman, Colossus and Warbird did -- kill-or-be-killed situations that had far more lives hanging in the balance than their own. Maxwell Lord at that point was beyond salvation and was too dangerous to live. He conrolled a highly secretive organization, hijacked one of the superhero community's inventions as a weapon against the heroes, killed another superhero and had control of arguably the greatest one in comic books.

I don't condone wanton murder, but Wonder Woman didn't brazenly kill the man out of some sick satisfaction or power trip. She potentially made a choice that was going to affect the world, or at least a sizable portion of the planet's fate.

Like I keep saying, Lord at that time was a rabid dog. And when a rabid dog is down, you put him down.

[Sabrinaset]

I'll play devil's advocate again, and use a real-life situation. What if Adolf Hitler was captured in battle, or even before he commited suicide? Here was an enemy who was too evil and far gone and undoubtedly too dangerous to be kept alive. His presence made the world a more dangerous place to live.

What would you all do with him?

Easy. We put him on trial, where he has access to lawyers and is able to defend his actions in a court of law.
In fact, this isn't a hypothetical situation, when we caught Saddam in his hideout, did we drop a grenade into his rat hole and kill him? No, we captured him, we feed him, and he's going to be put on trial by people who are appointed to uphold the law.
Now, let me ask you a question. Under what legal authority does Diana have the right to kill? Geez, when a police officer kills someone, even in self-defense, he still has to justify what he does before a panel convened for that purpose. Who does Diana answer to?

[Guts/Batman]

I'll play devil's advocate again, and use a real-life situation. What if Adolf Hitler was captured in battle, or even before he commited suicide? Here was an enemy who was too evil and far gone and undoubtedly too dangerous to be kept alive. His presence made the world a more dangerous place to live.

What would you all do with him?

Capping him then and there woulda sounded real good to me personally. He had done some thing that are, well, damned evil. He had clearly deserved death but I think that since he didn't have the ability to play with the mind of
one of (if not THE most powerful) person on Earth makes him less of a thread than Max was.

I probably would have taken him back and held for War Crimes (of which he VERY guilty of) and he would have been executed. So either way he ends up dead. I would probably feel less guilty in the end.

That said, history has 20/20 vision.

[Guts/Batman]

Easy. We put him on trial, where he has access to lawyers and is able to defend his actions in a court of law.
In fact, this isn't a hypothetical situation, when we caught Saddam in his hideout, did we drop a grenade into his rat hole and kill him? No, we captured him, we feed him, and he's going to be put on trial by people who are appointed to uphold the law.
Now, let me ask you a question. Under what legal authority does Diana have the right to kill? Geez, when a police officer kills someone, even in self-defense, he still has to justify what he does before a panel convened for that purpose. Who does Diana answer to?

That probably will be addressed in the next issue of WW (if you read WW, that is).

And IIRC she does represent her country so she would have some protection form it.

And I agree with Smarty on this. When you have a rabid dog down you put him down.

[Jkid099]

Who does Diana answer to?

Well, judging by the cover of the next WW issue ... we'll probably be finding that out.

[Smarty Jones]

"In fact, this isn't a hypothetical situation, when we caught Saddam in his hideout, did we drop a grenade into his rat hole and kill him? No, we captured him, we feed him, and he's going to be put on trial by people who are appointed to uphold the law."

Saddam Hussein's situation is not like Adolf Hitler's. Hitler declared war on the free world and overran Europe, killing millions of people in incredibly horrible manners. Had Hitler won, potentially millions more would have been wiped off the face of the Earth or subjected to incredibly inhumane conditions.

Hussein did exact forms of tyranny and torture on some of his people in Iraq, but not nearly on the scale as Hitler did to the Jewish people. Hussein's primary foe was the United States, for reasons people feel were more than a clash in politics (namely, oil and a personal vendetta by President Bush).

Hussein's presence really did not make the planet a dangerous place to live. Hitler's did, especially given the incredible loyalty he instilled in his troops and admirers. Hussein has never been the threat Hitler was.

To give a comic book comparison, what Electro did in "New Avengers" (releasing the prisoners in The Raft) would be akin to the punishment for Hussein -- namely, a trial.

For what Lord did, it would be akin to what I would have done with Hitler -- killed him on the spot, because he was too dangerous to keep alive.

[Smarty Jones]

"Uh... I gave you six options that lacked lethal force, and deciding to use any one of those would've been... a decision. :confused:"

You gave six ideas YOU THOUGHT would be appropriate for the situation. I personally felt they all were inadequate, because they never worked in the past and you're dealing with a villain who was a major planetary threat.

[aeastwic]

Whether or not Diana is wrong about killing Maxwell Lord, I personally don't understand why some people are either surprised or disgusted with her actions concerning Maxwell Lord. She's killed before. Many times. It's in her nature. If she feels no other peaceful options are available then someone's head is getting chopped off.

I don't understand why some people are opposed to the idea of WW killing someone.

Because some people can't fit it into their world view.

[Guts/Batman]

You gave six ideas YOU THOUGHT would be appropriate for the situation. I personally felt they all were inadequate, because they never worked in the past and you're dealing with a villain who was a major planetary threat.

Any of you read the Rucka interview that was in the OMAC thread?

All the options that Rucka said Diana had, those would been killing him without literally killing him.

[Smarty Jones]

"Any of you read the Rucka interview that was in the OMAC thread?

All the options that Rucka said Diana had, those would been killing him without literally killing him."

For an enemy that dangerous -- and given the methods described by some that did not work or have lasting effect in the DC Universe -- nothing short of death was going to stop Maxwell Lord from being dangerous.

Lord simply had no restraint, and really no other viable way of being restrained. He had incredible resources, no compunctions about killing and was controlling arguably the most powerful superhero in the DC Universe. If Wonder Woman had not stopped him, practically every superhero may have as well painted bull's-eyes on their heads.

Even as it is, now that he's dead, Lord's plan of taking out the superheroes is going full-gear with an out-of-control OMAC.

[bfrank]

And look how many people have died because Batman never crossed that line in regards to the Joker, who breaks out of Arkham every other week.


Thank you...

[Z-man]

You gave six ideas YOU THOUGHT would be appropriate for the situation. I personally felt they all were inadequate, because they never worked in the past and you're dealing with a villain who was a major planetary threat.

1.Since when has death worked in the past in the DCU?

2. All of those techniques did work in the past, at least long enough for people to consider all their actions.

[bfrank]

If you lobotomize Max, or remove at least a part of his brain, you take away his ability to control Superman, while still leaving him his life and the chance to redeem himself, even with a dimished capacity to affect it. And before you get on my case about people with far-below intelligences having inferior lives, just look at Paris Hilton!
Someone brought up that Diana is a soldier, and should be held to the same standards as a Policeman or member of the Armed Forces. Well, okay, sure, but by that logic, anytime a policeman kills someone, there are review boards and tons of paperwork to ensure that the officer did the right thing. Soldiers?
Okay, in war it's a little harder, but officers still have a chain of command and there are rules that have to be followed. Exactly what authority does Diana have to enforce the law in the United States?
Now, I suppose she'll get off on a technicality. She is an ambassador to Paradise Island, and has Diplomatic Immunity, just like Dr. Doom. I just don't think she deserves it.

how many depowered telepaths can you think of?

edit: IIRC the weren't in the states....

[Guts/Batman]

For an enemy that dangerous -- and given the methods described by some that did not work or have lasting effect in the DC Universe -- nothing short of death was going to stop Maxwell Lord from being dangerous.

Lord simply had no restraint, and really no other viable way of being restrained. He had incredible resources, no compunctions about killing and was controlling arguably the most powerful superhero in the DC Universe. If Wonder Woman had not stopped him, practically every superhero may have as well painted bull's-eyes on their heads.

Even as it is, now that he's dead, Lord's plan of taking out the superheroes is going full-gear with an out-of-control OMAC.

I agree with you completely. Much better off dead. It was shown that he WW couldn't force him to stop Max from controlling Clark. Death is the only way his particular situation would be ended. Brother Eye is something else altogether.

It is arguably more dangerous with Max gone.

And he is indeed staying that way. This is no gimmick death.

Plus, he tells WW that he had been doing this for years to get Superman to be his "Ultimate OMAC". He is not letting go of this weapon. It is kinda like the ring in LOTR.

Would have been interesting if Bruce had been there. But as it were it is much more interesting now that he, Sasha and Jessica know that Brother Eye is now alive.

My personal feeling is that Max was living on borrowed time for another reason. If he had managed to get Superman to kill Diana. I would bet that Brother Eye would have killed Max at some point.

I read on the DC boards that some people were saying that he wanted to die. I don't believe that for a second or see how anyone can believe that, either.

Dude controls Superman and the world's most powerful satellite that can make superhero killing OMACs. Yea, he wants to die.

Max's death will come back to bite the JLA's ass. As we will undoubtedly see in VU #4 this Wednesday.

[Z-man]

For an enemy that dangerous -- and given the methods described by some that did not work or have lasting effect in the DC Universe -- nothing short of death was going to stop Maxwell Lord from being dangerous.

Lord simply had no restraint, and really no other viable way of being restrained. He had incredible resources, no compunctions about killing and was controlling arguably the most powerful superhero in the DC Universe. If Wonder Woman had not stopped him, practically every superhero may have as well painted bull's-eyes on their heads.

Not at the moment in which he was killed he wasn't. You keep talking about a Lord that didn't exist anymore.

Even as it is, now that he's dead, Lord's plan of taking out the superheroes is going full-gear with an out-of-control OMAC.

Geez, if only they had a live captive that J'onn could enter the mind of and find out how to defeat it. But how would they ever get that?

[Z-man]

Any of you read the Rucka interview that was in the OMAC thread?

All the options that Rucka said Diana had, those would been killing him without literally killing him.

So, he admits that there were ways to stop Max without killing him, and thus when he said while in the lasso that killing him would stop him, that doesn't mean it was the only way. 'Cause, y'know, it wasn't.

[bfrank]

How is it naive? There's a problem -- a big one -- inherent in, "Well, I'm going to kill you for something you haven't done yet but might do sometime in the future" -- that problem being that you could look at every man, woman and child in the Universe and say, "You might become a serial killer tomorrow, so I'll have to kill you now" -- and I'm really hoping that problem is self-explanatory.

that's not what happened, but if it works for you ok...

[bfrank]

What ever happened to getting input from the victim?
Diana wasn't a victim?

[Guts/Batman]

So, he admits that there were ways to stop Max without killing him, and thus when he said while in the lasso that killing him would stop him, that doesn't mean it was the only way. 'Cause, y'know, it wasn't.

I'll get the link to this thread.

[Z-man]

And he is indeed staying that way. This is no gimmick death.

It's an Infinite Crisis comic, they're all gimmick deaths. Moreso when you read the Rucka interview.

[bfrank]

And, correct me if I'm wrong, but don't they establish that the lasso is keeping him from using his powers to control Superman, since they are another kind of lie.
I think your wrong, in that the only thing that stopped superman was a tiara to the thoat...and that wasn't keeping him down for long...

[bfrank]

Z-man already answered this -- if you ask me what I'm going to do tomorrow, I'm going to give you an honest answer, my plans for tomorrow. Those plans might change, but I didn't know about all those other things at the time you asked me.
that doesn't even compare....

[Guts/Batman]

It's an Infinite Crisis comic, they're all gimmick deaths. Moreso when you read the Rucka interview.

That is true. I meant from the point is that he is really dead. He is not really coming back.

This is the link to the Rucka interview I am talking about.

Originally postsed by Yoda.
http://www.newsarama.com/dcnew/countdown/SpoilerWW219.html

[Z-man]

that doesn't even compare....

Pardon? How so? It's just a simple means of delineating the difference between the truth and a fact.

[Sabrinaset]

Saddam Hussein's situation is not like Adolf Hitler's. Hitler declared war on the free world and overran Europe, killing millions of people in incredibly horrible manners. Had Hitler won, potentially millions more would have been wiped off the face of the Earth or subjected to incredibly inhumane conditions.

Hussein did exact forms of tyranny and torture on some of his people in Iraq, but not nearly on the scale as Hitler did to the Jewish people. Hussein's primary foe was the United States, for reasons people feel were more than a clash in politics (namely, oil and a personal vendetta by President Bush).

Hussein's presence really did not make the planet a dangerous place to live. Hitler's did, especially given the incredible loyalty he instilled in his troops and admirers. Hussein has never been the threat Hitler was.

To give a comic book comparison, what Electro did in "New Avengers" (releasing the prisoners in The Raft) would be akin to the punishment for Hussein -- namely, a trial.

For what Lord did, it would be akin to what I would have done with Hitler -- killed him on the spot, because he was too dangerous to keep alive.

You know, Smarty, I completely disagree with you. I mean, I like you, so don't take it personally, but I completely disagree with you :) Maybe it's because my big brother is in Iraq right now, I dunno.... lemee take this a point at a time:
Hitler declared war on the free world and overran Europe, only to be stopped by the US, England, and Russia, where Saddam declared war on the the Western World (mostly the US) and after a war in which he couldn't invade Iran, overran Kuwait, threatening Saudi Arabia, only to be stopped by a US-led coalition. Had Hussein continued on without being stopped, he could well have controlled the world's oil supply, and thus the world economy.
Hitler and Hussein both practiced forms of racial genocide, the Jews for Hitler, and the Kurds for Hussein. The only reason Hussein wasn't able to kill more is simply due to scale, Saddam didn 't have the population to exterminate as Hitler did, but you can be sure that if he did have the numbers, he would have. It has been estimated that Saddam has killed up to one million Arabs, and while that estimate might be high and I can't be sure of the exact number, I think after the first few hundred thousand, the numbers cease to matter (if you get my point)
Hussein, if he hadn't been stopped, by simply controlling the oil supply would have been VERY powerful and quite dangerous. It has also been proven that he has funded and supplied terrorist organizations (and forget al-Quada, he personally paid the families of suicide bombers who died for Jihad), had weapons of mass destruction (which he used against the Kurds, then again where they are now is anyone's guess) so yeah, he did make the world a more dangerous place in his own way.
In short, if Hitler was a bigger threat, it was because he had more land, more charisma, more ambition, and more resources. It's all a matter of scale. Saddam is Hitler lite, but that doesn't make his actions any less evil, and if youd seen the pictures of mass graves my brother has sent me, pictures you won't see on the local news by the way, you'd know it too.
And as for your last point, for years after the war, we really didn't KNOW that Hitler was dead or alive. We assumed that the Russians were being truthful about finding his ashes, but there was no body, so it was possible that he was still "out there". I have no doubt that if he was found, he would have been given a trial just like all the other Nazis we found later on.
I haveta say though, that I kinda like argueing with you, because at least you back up your argument and don't just scream about it like some immature person or something :)
Then again you better realize that I'm the same way :)

[bfrank]

Killing is not a very heroic act.
no, it's much better to let the bad guys live to murder again!

[bfrank]

[QUOTE=Peter]
Diana has dealt with super-powerful telepaths before, an entire race of them. She also knows how pointless killing badguys in the DCU is, since they have a tendency to return really angry and more powerful.




[QUOTE]
following that logic, she knows how pointless it is to lock them up to boot....

[bfrank]

But they weren't defeated captives.



didn't he hit them with gold k first to render them powerless...

[bfrank]

Okay...

1. Killing somebody mid-combat -- what Cap, Colossus and Warbird did -- totally different to murdering a defeated prisoner. Get the point, because I'm losing my patience.

2. No, if I'd been Wonder Woman, Max would be in the Phantom Zone or frozen in time or whatever -- so my bodycount would be *zero*.

3. That kind of flame is insulting, and I'd believed you were a better poster than that.
I guess that's what happens when don't have all your points together...

Perhaps if you had read the book carefully you would have noticed that the lasso did nothing to his powers...NOT.A.THING.

get it? cuz I'm loosing my patience :rolleyes:

[bfrank]

Maxwell Lord was a human being, capable of complex thought, not a dog. He was also, as you point out, not suffering from a disease such as a rabid dog is.
and in this case, he showed him self to be an enemy to the entire human race...a few steps below ole' yeller...

[Guts/Batman]

Rucka said that dropping Max into the Phantom Zone would, in fact, kill him?

[bfrank]

Right, so freezing Max in time or dropping him in the Phantom Zone is the same as simply letting him go free. Great analogy there. You're not trying to distort what I'm trying to say just to make me look bad and make yourself look morally superior, of course not.

Even though you can't tell the difference between killing-in-combat and cold-blooded-execution, nor the difference between a human life and a rabid dog. But there you go.

are you the pot or is he?

[bfrank]

Okay, Smarty Jones, let's see...

You're rationalizing the same act done by other noble heroes in times of great stress and high stakes, and arbitrarily accepting some and rejecting others.

They're not all necesarily the same act, there's motive to consider, for one thing, and opportunity to take a different path. I again ask you to consider what happenned with Star Boy in an old LSH story.


1.) The three Kryptonians had slaughtered an entire plant, and each were basically Superman's equal, Sabrinaset. They boasted of slaughtering other planets and Superman's Earth was next. The event may have bothered Superman's morality, but in the end he knew that was a small price to pay for possibly saving the universe.

I'll grant you that point. I think the point I was trying to make was that it bothered Superman GREATLY, and seems to me to the defining moment in Byrne's Superman run. It really irritates me that Diana doesn't seem to care that she killed someone when she could surely have found a better way.



Could we maybe see a follow up issue before you start making judgements?

It seems to me ou have noting to irritated at in that Superman has had close to 20 years to show the effects...You've given Wonder Woman about six panels to show the same thing...

[Sabrinaset]

how many depowered telepaths can you think of?

edit: IIRC they weren't in the states....

Well there was that one episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation when the Enterprise was caught by a 2-D space alien and Deanna Troi loses her telepathy, does that count? :)

...and yeah, you're right about the states thing...but Maxwell Lord IS a United States citizen. I think.

[Sabrinaset]

Could we maybe see a follow up issue before you start making judgements?

It seems to me ou have noting to irritated at in that Superman has had close to 20 years to show the effects...You've given Wonder Woman about six panels to show the same thing...

I say that because of what I read in the Rucka interview where he says you won't be seeing Diana show any guilt over what she did. I probably should have said that.

Here's what Rucka said :But back to what we were talking about, I know there are going to be people who hope to see Diana tearing out her hair, rend her clothes, and smear ashes on her breast, but she’s not gonna.

[bfrank]

Max could not have broken out of his restraints, his powers didn't work on her and in a fight Diana could tear him in half. And it was only through crappy writing that she didn't immediately telepathically call for help.



who was she gonna call? As far a we know J'onn was still stuck in the loop...Marvel's off fighting the Spectre..you see where I'm going with this...

[bfrank]

Well there was that one episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation when the Enterprise was caught by a 2-D space alien and Deanna Troi loses her telepathy, does that count? :)

...and yeah, you're right about the states thing...but Maxwell Lord IS a United States citizen. I think.

and didn't she get it back...

[Xero Kaiser]

Easy. We put him on trial, where he has access to lawyers and is able to defend his actions in a court of law.
In fact, this isn't a hypothetical situation, when we caught Saddam in his hideout, did we drop a grenade into his rat hole and kill him? No, we captured him, we feed him, and he's going to be put on trial by people who are appointed to uphold the law.
Now, let me ask you a question. Under what legal authority does Diana have the right to kill? Geez, when a police officer kills someone, even in self-defense, he still has to justify what he does before a panel convened for that purpose. Who does Diana answer to?

you're more concerned with the legality of the situation than the fact that WW prevented superman from killing god knows how many people. normal laws and procedures weren't made with genocidal metahumans in mind, so why are we holding them to the same standards as a bank robber? you can't have a one-size-fits-all solution to these things.

and yeah..if saddam or hitler had superpowers I doubt anyone would've said, "lock him up and keep an eye on him"

[bfrank]

And Batman went out of his way to create OMAC or Brother 1 or whatever.

So why aren't you arguing that we should kill him, too?
because he wasn't using it to try to kill folks?

don't tell me that you can't see the difference....

[Guts/Batman]

NRAMA: So indulge us a little now…

GR: Okay – the knock-out. Max says, “What do you thinking is going to happen when I wake up? And it doesn’t take much for me to regain control.”

NRAMA: Lock him up?

GR: How well would that work in the DCU? And Max knows that. How well has the process of locking up absolute lunatics worked in the DCU? That’s gone swimmingly for them. Arkham has a Frequent Inmate card. “Hello again Mr. Joker, your suite is ready as you like it.”

Alcatraz? Where he’d be conscious? The Phantom Zone? He’d die in the Phantom Zone. An infinite teleportation loop? He’d eventually die from signal decay. A chemically induced coma? How’s that not killing him?


That bit is from the Rucka interview on WW #219.

It was shown that the Lasso could not prevent him from controlling Clark.

Serious, what else is there?

[Sabrinaset]

you're more concerned with the legality of the situation than the fact that WW prevented superman from killing god knows how many people. normal laws and procedures weren't made with genocidal metahumans in mind, so why are we holding them to the same standards as a bank robber? you can't have a one-size-fits-all solution to these things.

and yeah..if saddam or hitler had superpowers I doubt anyone would've said, "lock him up and keep an eye on him"

Depends on what those superpowers were! :)

The whole point here was that Diana could have, should have, found a way to disable Max without killing him. That's what heroes do, that's why we have comic books glorifying them. Well, most of them. Some of them?

Seems to me that the law has to apply to ALL people, or else it ends up applying to NONE. Really, when you think about it, all super-heroes are law-breakers, and the reason why Watchmen is still popular 20 years after it was made is because it came very close to what people would treat super heroes like in the real worls. The cops WOULD be resentful of them!
Normal laws don't apply to genocidal supervillains? Really? Wouldn't what Max does be "Illegal Coercion"? Wonder Woman..."Second Degree Murder"?
The whole point of this thread is that WW had at least six ways to disable Max without taking his life. Sure, his life might not be comfortable, but he would still be alive after a fashion.
The underlying problem that we're all sort of dancing around is, how does the law deal with a super-hero who kills? Who do they answer to, and if in fact they answer to no one, how do you ensure a set of controls on them? How do you deal with heroes who feel they are above the law? How does the public feel about self-appointed protectors who come and go as they please, and who are answerable to no one? Wouldn't you tend to FEAR these people, instead of looking up to them? If you're a hero, is that what you'd want? The thing is, although I don't remember seeing any appear, Max has to have family somewhere, and in the real world, you can be sure they would be pressing charges against Diana.

How HAS the law had to change within the DC/Marvel Universes because of the presence of Super-heroes? Besides She-Hulk, has that been addressed? Might be a good topic for another thread...

If anything, I would say that these issues, instead of predating Infinite Crisis, would be better off as a prequel to Kingdom Come.

[yeoman]

That bit is from the Rucka interview on WW #219.

It was shown that the Lasso could not prevent him from controlling Clark.

Serious, what else is there?

The fact that Rucka's comment ignore that several of those options that will kill Max eventually, will not do so short term. Which given what the JLA has access to, they only need a short term stop gap solution.

And since when is the Phantom Zone going to kill him? Lar Gand spent a 1,000 years in it, with lead poisoning, and came out no worse than when he went in. Both Pre- and post-Crisis.

Or did they change that?

[yeoman]

who was she gonna call?

Ghost Busters?



:D


As far a we know J'onn was still stuck in the loop...Marvel's off fighting the Spectre..you see where I'm going with this...

Well, clock, max, whip out the JLA communicator, tell them to call the JSA. Or, heck, have them bring in Hal to construct some sort of mental shield ring construct so that Max can't get mind control brain waves out.

Or just wrap tin foil arond Clark's head.

[Sabrinaset]

and didn't she get it back...

Hey, you didn't say PERMANENTLY lose it!

[yeoman]

1.Since when has death worked in the past in the DCU?



Jason Todd? Wait... Hal Jordon? Hmmm... Superman? Damn... Doomsda... crap... Lex Luthor...


Uh, Barry and Ice are still dead.

[Guts/Batman]

I don't know about the Phantom Zone too well.

But that is true about the stop gap measure. Didn't really think of it that way.

[Xero Kaiser]

Normal laws don't apply to genocidal supervillains? Really? Wouldn't what Max does be "Illegal Coercion"? Wonder Woman..."Second Degree Murder"?

does mind control count as illegal coercion? or is that just the closest thing you can think of? what do you do with doomsday? charge him with murder? wasn't he basically mindless at 1st? is he even fit to stand trial? what the hell do you charge darkseid with? or those 3 kryptonians that wiped out a planet? can you even arrest someone for something they did in an alternate reality? how do you prove someone has mind control powers?

Wouldn't you tend to FEAR these people, instead of looking up to them? If you're a hero, is that what you'd want?

a lot of people tend to step lightly around cops, might have something to do with the guns. imagine that times 1000. I imagine most people wouldn't be too eager to get in superman's face regardless of how nice you think he is.

The thing is, although I don't remember seeing any appear, Max has to have family somewhere, and in the real world, you can be sure they would be pressing charges against Diana.

if someone tried to kill you in the real world and would up getting themselves killed instead, the family doesn't have much of a case. though I'm sure they'd try anyway

[Peter]

J'Onn's arguably one of the most powerful telepaths in the DCU and he couldn't affect the construct in any way.

A construct created by a B-grade telepath, which brings us back to the bad writing explanation.

[Peter]

You're obviously missing the point here -- Captain America had to make a decision that forced him to make lethal force...

And using lethal force is a non-issue when your opponent is already dead.

lest the lives of others would be impacted adversely.

And for the 20th time, it was mid-combat, and *not* to a defeated prisoner, which is a point you're obviously missing.

[Peter]

OK, not even taking into consideration that the vast majority of vampires in comic books have appeared in Marvel and most of the ones Superman and Batman took out were minor characters ...

Except for, you know, the time when Superman killed Count Dracula.

Who -- just a guess -- I don't think counts as a minor, supporting character.

Edit -- or the time when Superman took out Crucifier (or did somebody else actually kill him? I've repressed memories of that storyline -- well, because it was awful -- but nobody showed any concern about killing him that major character) who was the major badguy in *his* story.

[Peter]

I think the reason some of you all are upset with this is not the fact that Maxwell Lord is dead (I cannot see anyone feeling sorry for him)....

The reason this issue bothers me is that a hero had a plethora of other options to stop Lord, but chose instead to simply murder him. And the fact that people keep repeating, "She had no other options!" is really bothersome -- because Jeff, Z-man and myself have shown multiple times (sometimes in the same post) that this is wholly false.

[Peter]

Again, presuming a lot of things -- based on old superhero codes.

Wait, so you're actually arguing that being frozen in time, magically kept unconscious or being dumped into another dimension (!) *would not be able to keep Lord's powers in check*?

Sorry, but I need to say, that's laughable.

Given this is Wonder Woman, Diana could break a person's neck faster than the person can think about preventing.

Congratulations, you're getting the point.

Diana *is* that fast -- so why was killing him her only option, when she could've done half a dozen things before he even realised they were happening?

[Sabrinaset]

Okay, Xero...

does mind control count as illegal coercion?

Yep. Don't forget, btw, I asked in my post how the laws in the Marvel/DCU would have to change to adapt to super-heroes. So, continuing with your questions...

what do you do with doomsday? charge him with murder? wasn't he basically mindless at 1st? is he even fit to stand trial?

I assume he'd be dealt with the same way as a child who got hold of a gun and shot someone. I'd love to see the Juvenile Hall that gets his case! Or his caseworker...Then again, if he's considered completely incapable of standing trial, the law would look for his legal guardian, and if there wasn't one, appoint one for him. How to keep him restrained until then ... well, that's what the DEO is for, I guess.


what the hell do you charge darkseid with?

What crimes has he committed here on Earth? Well, he HAS kidnapped Superman in the past, but then again, as the ruler of a Planet, he does have diplomatic immunity, I suppose. in the DCU, does Apokolips have an embassy?

or those 3 kryptonians that wiped out a planet?

Genocide? Crimes against an Alternate Humanity?

can you even arrest someone for something they did in an alternate reality?

Not unless you have juristiction over it.

how do you prove someone has mind control powers?

Good question. Remember a JLA issue Waid wrote where the Martian Manhunter decided to mentally probe Congress, and ran away screaming? The hypothesis was that the DEO had placed mind screens in place to protect government officials from someone doing exactly what J'onn was about to do? I would assume that in a world where 1.5 million people have super powers, the government has come up with ways of it's own to find out who can do what, and try to protect itself where it can.


a lot of people tend to step lightly around cops, might have something to do with the guns. imagine that times 1000. I imagine most people wouldn't be too eager to get in superman's face regardless of how nice you think he is.

Yeah, we're already worried about the police now. (See: Patriot Act) Imagine if they could fly and had X-Ray vision. That's my whole point. Now instead of cops, call them "Super-heroes" and imagine them flying about without any laws to restrain them. Imagine if they could kill people, and they never had to explain their actions, even if they were justified. That's my whole point.


if someone tried to kill you in the real world and would up getting themselves killed instead, the family doesn't have much of a case. though I'm sure they'd try anyway

In a world in which someone got off of murder charges because they'd eaten too many Twinkees, a world in which a woman gets millions from McDonalds because she spilled hot coffee in her lap, and a world in which it took forever to get Gotti convicted, don't be so sure. Well, if she's tried in California, she's probably safe! Besides, that was also my point. Do you imagine Diana willingly going to trial? Whgo's going to force her? And when you consider that she can fly, run at super-speed, and has access to JLA teleportation devices, well, talk about a flight risk! In addition, I think she comes across as arrogant at times, that won't play well in front of a jury. It's a moot point anyway, she has Diplomatic Immunity. But see, we resent it when some diplomat from Saudi Arabia gets a million dollars in parking fines and won't pay because of their immunity, what about someone like Diana who just killed someone? She literally is going to get away with murder. Some hero.

[Peter]

You gave six ideas YOU THOUGHT would be appropriate for the situation.

And how on Earth is Max going to get around suspended animation, being put into stasis or dumped into another dimension?

I call any solution that keeps a bodycount at "zero" to be appropriate, as a matter of fact. And all of those things would've worked.

Max had no time to act telepathically before Diana killed him -- and this is by your own admission. So why would he have had time to act if she was merely knocking him unconscious, or sending him to the Phantom Zone (that place that successfully held an entire race of powerful telepaths)?

Again -- she had other options that would've worked. You just can't admit to it, because it's neato and kewl to see a superhero kill somebody.

[Peter]

Even as it is, now that he's dead, Lord's plan of taking out the superheroes is going full-gear with an out-of-control OMAC.

So, in essense, killing Lord accomplished nothing *anyway*...

... and in fact, might just have made the situation worse, because the good guys just lost an impossibly-valuable source of information about this whole OMAC thing.

So, why was killing him a good idea, again?

[Peter]

And he is indeed staying that way. This is no gimmick death.

Which is what they said about Jason Todd.

Edit -- and Barry, and Hal, and Oliver Queen, and all those dozens of Supergirls that keep coming back and dying, and all those villains, and... well, you can see where I'm going with this.

[Peter]

that doesn't even compare....

Actually, it does.

Killing him would've stopped him, that's truthful.

But dumping him in the Phantom Zone also would've stopped him. Putting telepath-proof headgear on Superman, freezing Max in time, giving him a quick bop to the head, magically lobotomising him, etc etc -- all things that would also have stopped him. He just didn't mention them.

If you ask me what I've got in a sack, I can say "apples" when in fact I have every fruit and vegetable known to mankind -- and I'm still being truthful by replying with just "apples".

[Peter]

following that logic, she knows how pointless it is to lock them up to boot....

Actually... the Phantom Zone held the White Martians for, what, a few thousand years before they escaped? I say that's a pretty good holding cell, particularly given Max doesn't have close to the powers and resources they had.

If only they'd sent them straight back, we wouldn't have got "Terror Incognito".

[Guts/Batman]

Which is what they said about Jason Todd.

Edit -- and Barry, and Hal, and Oliver Queen, and all those dozens of Supergirls that keep coming back and dying, and all those villains, and... well, you can see where I'm going with this.

Can't really argue with that.

[Guts/Batman]

I dunno how much info that MM or Zatanna or whoever could give them. I think it very debatable of how much Max knew about the plot of Brother Eye.

Oh and the JLA definitely poo-pooed the idea of a mindwipe in Adventures of Superman #642. Well, a mindwipe of Superman.

"Welll, we could have Zatanna..."

Carter, Wally and Dinah said "Definitely not." at the same time. I don't think they wanted another mindwipe.

[Peter]

Oh and the JLA definitely poo-pooed the idea of a mindwipe in Adventures of Superman #642. Well, a mindwipe of Superman.

"Welll, we could have Zatanna..."

Carter, Wally and Dinah said "Definitely not." at the same time. I don't think they wanted another mindwipe.

We don't want to mindwipe Superman, we just want to take *out* the program that Lord built into his brain.

As for Lord -- I keep thinking of the Power Neutraliser that Luthor used against the Justice Lords in "Better World pt 2". Sure it was a different continuity, but somebody in the DCU must have something like that around. The Leaguers have shown before (Midsummers Nightmare) that if metahumans pose a threat, they'll remove their powers and not feel too badly about it. Somehow taking away Lord's powers would work fine (and given he's temporary imprisoned in the Phantom Zone or frozen in time or whatever, he's not going to have much say in the matter).

[yeoman]

We don't want to mindwipe Superman, we just want to take *out* the program that Lord built into his brain.

As for Lord -- I keep thinking of the Power Neutraliser that Luthor used against the Justice Lords in "Better World pt 2". Sure it was a different continuity, but somebody in the DCU must have something like that around. The Leaguers have shown before (Midsummers Nightmare) that if metahumans pose a threat, they'll remove their powers and not feel too badly about it. Somehow taking away Lord's powers would work fine (and given he's temporary imprisoned in the Phantom Zone or frozen in time or whatever, he's not going to have much say in the matter).


Knock him out, open his eyelids, heat vision lobotomy the mind controlly parts.

[yeoman]

So, in essense, killing Lord accomplished nothing *anyway*...

... and in fact, might just have made the situation worse, because the good guys just lost an impossibly-valuable source of information about this whole OMAC thing.

So, why was killing him a good idea, again?

Remind me again. What's the satellite got to deal with J'onn, Kal, Diana, John Stewert, Hal, Power GIrl and how enver chucking bits of moon at it? Cause, ya know, I'm not feeling overly threatened by it.

[Guts/Batman]

I guess my overall question is: How powerful was Max? We also don't know what else he can do. (From a readers standpoint)

I guess I have never really gotten that from this mini. He tells WW that it has taken him years to be able to do this to him.

That is probably true about the power neutralizer. Prersonally, I don't like assuming things.

I do see how WW had many, many options. I guess, I just don't have a problem with her killling Max is all. I was kinda waiting for him to die anyways. Be it Brother Eye or someone else.

In addition it is kind of odd that Max said "Kill me." He could have said other ways to do it but said "Kill me.", instead.

And I would probably say that killing Max does indeed worsen the problem because OMAC is now free from ALL human control.

[Peter]

Knock him out, open his eyelids, heat vision lobotomy the mind controlly parts.

That's on the more extreme end of the situation (when compared to, say, Phantom Stranger or Spectre or JJ Thunder or whoever simply removing his powers), but certainly still doable. I mean you're not leaving him a vegetable (which is what distinguished the Lords).

And that way, body count is zero, Superman is *not* a threat to the world, and the JLA has a live captive who they can interrogate at will over this whole OMAC mess. *nods*

[yeoman]

Except for, you know, the time when Superman killed Count Dracula.

Who -- just a guess -- I don't think counts as a minor, supporting character.

Edit -- or the time when Superman took out Crucifier (or did somebody else actually kill him? I've repressed memories of that storyline -- well, because it was awful -- but nobody showed any concern about killing him that major character) who was the major badguy in *his* story.

Taking out Cruficer was a mercy killing. Merciful to the fans, meciful to the JLA, hell, if he was still around I'm sure Crucifer would thank them for taking him out.

[Peter]

Remind me again. What's the satellite got to deal with J'onn, Kal, Diana, John Stewert, Hal, Power GIrl and how enver chucking bits of moon at it? Cause, ya know, I'm not feeling overly threatened by it.

Uh... magic?

Yellow fear monst...no, scratch that one.

[Guts/Batman]

Remind me again. What's the satellite got to deal with J'onn, Kal, Diana, John Stewert, Hal, Power GIrl and how enver chucking bits of moon at it? Cause, ya know, I'm not feeling overly threatened by it.

Well the OMACs are specifically designed to deal with every hero. They have all the heros weaknesses. Yellow, fire, etc.

But I don't know how to physically deal with Diana. Maybe I am missing something about her.

In addition, no one knows where the satellite is. Hard throwing moons at a satellite you don't know where it is.

[Peter]

I guess my overall question is: How powerful was Max? We also don't know what else he can do. (From a readers standpoint)

But -- taking the Phantom Zone as an example -- we can be 99.9% certain that it would have held him (as a temporary holding cell), since it held a race of powerful telepaths for thousands of years.

I do see how WW had many, many options. I guess, I just don't have a problem with her killling Max is all. I was kinda waiting for him to die anyways. Be it Brother Eye or someone else.

Again, it's understandable why she killed him, but she certainly did have other options that -- given the whole OMAC thing -- probably would've been better in the long run, while still removing Lord and Superman as potential world-ending threats.

[Guts/Batman]

But -- taking the Phantom Zone as an example -- we can be 99.9% certain that it would have held him (as a temporary holding cell), since it held a race of powerful telepaths for thousands of years.



Again, it's understandable why she killed him, but she certainly did have other options that -- given the whole OMAC thing -- probably would've been better in the long run, while still removing Lord and Superman as potential world-ending threats.

I can't really argue against either of those.

[Xero Kaiser]

But see, we resent it when some diplomat from Saudi Arabia gets a million dollars in parking fines and won't pay because of their immunity, what about someone like Diana who just killed someone? She literally is going to get away with murder. Some hero.

see, not paying your parking tickets isn't serving a greater good though. you aren't doing anyone a favor or protecting people by parking sideways on a one-way street. one of these people is taking advantage of the system to serve themselves, the other one risked widespread death/destruction through inaction. it's not like she picked up some random guy on the street, broke his neck and waved her diplomatic immunity in our faces before flying off to the moon.

[Peter]

In addition, no one knows where the satellite is. Hard throwing moons at a satellite you don't know where it is.

There's only so many places it could potentially be, though.

I mean Superman can hear microwaves. And he, J'Onn, Diana, three or four GLs, Captain Marvel and Captain Atom could all patrol the Earth's atmosphere in practically a few seconds.

[Guts/Batman]

There's only so many places it could potentially be, though.

I mean Superman can hear microwaves. And he, J'Onn, Diana, three or four GLs, Captain Marvel and Captain Atom could all patrol the Earth's atmosphere in practically a few seconds.

That is true.

The only ones to be searching for it at the same was WW and Booster Gold. Batman has been looking since Countdown for it from the Watchtower. No luck for those 3.

It could be cloaked like the Injustice League's space base was in Rock of Ages.

It was Bruce afterall. I think he could put together a satellite that could elude almost all capture, given that he knows most heros capabilities.

[Guts/Batman]

I guess some of this comes to me the way it does because I don't see WW as the hero (when compared to the hero ethics that Bruce and Clark have). I see her more as a warrior.

[kingdom2000]

If my understanding of the lasso is correct, the only power it has is truth. It wasn't stopping his powers, he was just choosing not use them at that moment because he could have used Supes to stop WW easily. The interesting thing is that he admitted by being in the lasso that the ONLY way to stop him would be to kill him. His words while wrapped in the lasso of truth. No ambiguity on his intentions and how to stop him.

As for everyone's else suggestions about lobotomies, status etc, frankly that is asinine. That is literally a fate worse then death. I know many equate life to the act of breathing and nothing else, but life is really about quality of life. Being lobotimized, locked in status forever, etc, that is a death cause the person sure as hell isn't living. Its part of the reason why our punishments as a society are based on removing a quality of life however you define it.

I especially love the idea that many seem to suggest, if they faced a death of themselves or loved ones, the one second available is more then enough to run through everything scenario imaginable and come to the optimum solution. That is what to consider. You have one second. What do you do? If it takes more then one second, you have failed.

So lets go with the favorite "knock him out and discuss". Then what? All you against WW decisions make a suggestion that is full proof and isn't just as bad as taking a life which a lobotomy is, raping his mind by taking it away, and all the other horrific "better alternatives" you all have come up with. The tamer ones have simply been the Joker Scenario redux (Bats refusing to kill him is simply not heroic when he kills a few hundred people next time).

[Z-man]

If my understanding of the lasso is correct, the only power it has is truth. It wasn't stopping his powers, he was just choosing not use them at that moment because he could have used Supes to stop WW easily. The interesting thing is that he admitted by being in the lasso that the ONLY way to stop him would be to kill him. His words while wrapped in the lasso of truth. No ambiguity on his intentions and how to stop him.

And yet we have word from the writer himself that it was not the only way, hence we know that Max's information or his thinking were incomplete.

As for everyone's else suggestions about lobotomies, status etc, frankly that is asinine. That is literally a fate worse then death. I know many equate life to the act of breathing and nothing else, but life is really about quality of life. Being lobotimized, locked in status forever, etc, that is a death cause the person sure as hell isn't living. Its part of the reason why our punishments as a society are based on removing a quality of life however you define it.

I especially love the idea that many seem to suggest, if they faced a death of themselves or loved ones, the one second available is more then enough to run through everything scenario imaginable and come to the optimum solution. That is what to consider. You have one second. What do you do? If it takes more then one second, you have failed.

I knock him out using my enhanced Amazon strength and speed and take a few more seconds. Max is still killable, after all, Diana has no problem, apparently, with killing a helpless opponent.

So lets go with the favorite "knock him out and discuss". Then what? All you against WW decisions make a suggestion that is full proof and isn't just as bad as taking a life which a lobotomy is, raping his mind by taking it away, and all the other horrific "better alternatives" you all have come up with. The tamer ones have simply been the Joker Scenario redux (Bats refusing to kill him is simply not heroic when he kills a few hundred people next time).

I see you have ignored all of the "exile" options, as they clash with your point. You've also ignored "remove his powers," but that's also a good option.

[kingdom2000]

Exile? To where? And for the "take away his powers". Again how? Another lobotomy? Again more then a little horrific idea. I just don't find that idea anymore casual then taking a life is. They all seem equal to me.

[Guts/Batman]

Exile? To where? And for the "take away his powers". Again how? Another lobotomy? Again more then a little horrific idea. I just don't find that idea anymore casual then taking a life is. They all seem equal to me.

The Phantom Zone. Peter and Z Man have made pretty good cases for this.

See A Midsummer's Night Dream for stripping metahumans of their powers. I haven't read it personally but Peter made a good case for it, IMO.

[kingdom2000]

Isn't the phantom zone escapable? And I read midsummers but don't remember the how of that story. I got to admit that next day quarterbacking is fun but I am still sticking with my 1 second to decide stance instead of the many and bizarre scenarios everyone keeps inventing.

[Smarty Jones]

"And how on Earth is Max going to get around suspended animation, being put into stasis or dumped into another dimension?

I call any solution that keeps a bodycount at "zero" to be appropriate, as a matter of fact. And all of those things would've worked.

Max had no time to act telepathically before Diana killed him -- and this is by your own admission. So why would he have had time to act if she was merely knocking him unconscious, or sending him to the Phantom Zone (that place that successfully held an entire race of powerful telepaths)?

Again -- she had other options that would've worked. You just can't admit to it, because it's neato and kewl to see a superhero kill somebody."

Quite frankly, you're merely interested in pissing contests and trying to play comic book lawyer.

Given the gravity of the situation, death was the most optimal choice to stopping Maxwell Lord -- you keep coming up with alternatives that were less effective and incurred more risk and liability on The JLA's behalf. I would think a broken neck is a much more permanent state that being put in The Phantom Zone (which has broken out of numerous times, not to mention characters like Prometheus have access to it) or your "kinder, gentler" methods of death, which had numerous trap doors.

Keep in mind that Lord still would have had control of Superman, which meant The JLA -- and the world -- had a ticking time bomb every second of Lord's and/or Superman's existence. That's a much greater risk than I would be willing to take, yet your train of thought encourages placing that burden on The JLA's shoulders.

The fact that writers decided not to leave well enough alone by bringing characters back to life is more poor logic on your behalf.

"The reason this issue bothers me is that a hero had a plethora of other options to stop Lord, but chose instead to simply murder him. And the fact that people keep repeating, 'She had no other options!' is really bothersome -- because Jeff, Z-man and myself have shown multiple times (sometimes in the same post) that this is wholly false."

Again, you're being nitpicky here. You're coming up with what YOU think are optimal solutions against a character who was powerful, resourceful and controlled the most iconic hero in the DC Universe. Those solutions you named possibly could work, but only by incurring more risk and burden on The JLA's behalf and not likely as permanent vs. a dangerous foe in the midst of a war.

Speaking for myself, saying "Wonder Woman had no other options" means that given the threat I saw no way that this could end without a pernament solution to a world-threatening issue. Contrary to your rantings, Lord was no longer "a B-list villain." He graduated to the upper echelon and at that point was arguably the most dangerous man in the world -- plus, he was willing to pull the trigger to start a brutal metahuman war.

[Tom]

a) J'Onn never said he couldn't affect it in any way. He said only he couldn't remove it without damaging Superman. I have no doubt he could have triggered the program, had he wished to do so, but obviously that would be the last thing J'Onn would wish to do. In contrast, I imagine someone like Grodd or Despero would find the idea amazingly cool.

b) Just as a superior programmer can hack into a system/program set up by an inferior one, it's entirely logical that a telepath superior to Max - and I've named several in this thread - could do the same to Max's telepathic programming.I'm sorry, but there's no logical progression here. There is nothing in the story to support this.

[Smarty Jones]

"You know, Smarty, I completely disagree with you. I mean, I like you, so don't take it personally, but I completely disagree with you :) Maybe it's because my big brother is in Iraq right now, I dunno.... lemee take this a point at a time:"

Your answer and disagreement is based on this last portion -- you have a personal tie to the affairs in Iraq.

Moving your personal feelings aside, you can't even begin to argue that Saddam Hussein is on the same level as Adolf Hitler. Hussein did not aspire to world domination, nor did his have an agenda of hatred that engulfed all of Europe. Hussein stayed in his borders with his affairs for the most part, save for the invasion of Kuwait in the early 1990s.

To give a comic book analogy, Hussein would be Lex Luthor and Hitler would be Maxwell Lord. The former has a sense of self-restraint that can be held in check by conventional means, the latter was too out of control and a wildcard to take a chance on rehabilitation.

[tangentman]

I realize that CBRers love their debates, comic book lawyering, and doing so at length. However, at this point in the thread, most of the arguments seem very circular and stagnant. I'm not really seeing ideas being discussed, just the same points recycled and otherwise restated. Is there any way to move on with the discussion and get off this non-productive debate over "alternative methods"?

Maybe the discussion could move in a different direction with a new angle? Say, discuss the political ramifications of Diana killing a bound enemy? I can certainly see Veronica Cale attempting to spin the Max Lord incident into another smear-campaign on Diana. We're fairly certain which Leaguers (Batman & Superman) will read WW the riot act for her decision.

Which Leaguers would be most likely to SUPPORT her call?

[Tom]

Again, how dangerous could he be if he was unconscious and kept that way? The Watchtower infirmary has sedatives, you know. Or they can just have one of the GLs put him in indefinite stasis. Or off to the Phantom Zone. Or Wally slows him down to the point of suspended animation.
I don't think any of these alternatives are morally superior to what she did.

[Tom]

A construct created by a B-grade telepath, which brings us back to the bad writing explanati