Bendis Looks Back on His Term as the "Avengers" Assemblyman

[XPac]

Personally I found the idea that Cap never kills pretty silly.

He's a soldier that has been shown blowing up bunkers and shooting planes out of the sky in his earliest potrayals. He was a soldier in war.

I can buy an aversion to lethal force when it's avoidable. But he'll kill. We've seen that aspect of him from his earliest potrayal. It's not only more logical but more consistant with the characters orign to have him use lethal force if necessary. The notion of a war time solider that absolutely refuses to take human life is pretty silly if you think about it.

It's fine to have Spider-Man or Superman to have "no killing" rules, but honestly it never made sense to make Captain America that character.

[Whip Whirlwind]

Agreed. At the same time though he should never be the type of character who is slaughtering random mooks a la wolverine.

[RDMacQ]

Cap don't kill. In the modern age he took out a Baron Blood but he's a monster, a vampire wich is essentialy a demon. We could mention WWII but even then writers retconed that he never killed even then. (that's a stretch but let's face it, he's not known for killing) Wolverine still kills on a regular basis. I know all the stuff Claremont did with him of the X-Men members saying they don't kill and he should not but all these wonderful code of conducts have been lost in memories.

Except for that time that Cap took a gun from an ULTIMATUM soldier and blew another guy away.

So, yeah, Cap kills. Deal with it.

[RDMacQ]

the Avengers really shouldn't have a place for indiscriminate killers and bloodthirsty type. if they do, then they are hypocrites for deposing Norman Osborn and his Dark Avengers.

They still aren't. None of those terms describe Wolverine. He's neither indiscriminate nor is he bloodthirsty.

[XPac]

Ultimatum Terrorist in the beggining of Gruenwald's run. It set of the chain of events that led to the whole The Captain storyline. Also, as to WWII, there are some old Roy Thomas Invaders issues (#21 comes to mind) in which Cap takes a machine gun and shoots down some enemy planes, that were after the bomber they were in. However, none of those qualify as murder. People really need to know the difference. Murder is killing someone unable to defend him/herself. Sort of what Wolverine has done many times, like with the old german soldier in recent UXF. (No matter his past crimes, he was then in no position to defend himself, so it qualifies as murder.) Executions are murder.
That's my whole problem with the justification to bring in Wolverine. You had a veteran WWII soldier and a former weapons manufacturer, both capable of and having killed in the past, and they say they should induct the little psycho to do the dirty deed when they don't feel like it. Awsome writing, Mr Bendis. Sure, it's as you said, it makes perfect sense... NOT. There are pleanty of Avengers capable of and who have killed in the past (Black Knight, Captain America, Thor, Iron Man, Hercules, MS/Capt Marvel, etc...), who have held themselves to the Avengers (former, unfortunately) standard of upholding the santicity of life and killing only as a last resort. You don't need to bring someone in just because "times are harder" (you wish. The only way you'd think this is if you'd never read an issue of Avengers before. Oh, wait...) and to do the "tough" deed, especially if when the moment to live up to your crap comes (Secret Invasion comes to mind), you fumble and let someone else do it.

Peace

I think it actually makes sense. I think Logan brings a different perspective, which may not always be popular with most heroes, but often is legitimate.

I think a good example of what Logan brings is at the start of House of M. Logan supported killing Wanda, which objectively speaking is a valid perspective. You had an insane reality warper that could literally end the world with a poorly phrases sentence. I'm not necessarily saying Logan was right... but he had a point. And it was a point that no one else except Emma was even willing to consider. I don't blame them, as Wanda was their friend and she was as much a victim as anyone... but it nonetheless illustrates why I think there is legitimate value in having that voice in the room.

Steve or Stark will kill if they feel it's necessary. But where they draw the line MIGHT not always be where it needs to be drawn. And the same can be said for Logan. Which is why you're better off having both.

[RDMacQ]

I think it actually makes sense. I think Logan brings a different perspective, which may not always be popular with most heroes, but often is legitimate.

I think a good example of what Logan brings is at the start of House of M. Logan supported killing Wanda, which objectively speaking is a valid perspective. You had an insane reality warper that could literally end the world with a poorly phrases sentence. I'm not necessarily saying Logan was right... but he had a point. And it was a point that no one else except Emma was even willing to consider. I don't blame them, as Wanda was their friend and she was as much a victim as anyone... but it nonetheless illustrates why I think there is legitimate value in having that voice in the room.

Steve or Stark will kill if they feel it's necessary. But where they draw the line MIGHT not always be where it needs to be drawn. And the same can be said for Logan. Which is why you're better off having both.

Right. Logan brings it up because he's willing to bring it up and tell people they need to consider it.

If you look at that conversation in House of M, they're all dancing around the topic of what to do. Wolvie brings it up as an option, mostly as a way to stop pussy footing around and get down to brass tacks. Because if she is this much of a threat and they're NOT willing to consider killing her, what ARE they going to do? What ARE they talking about?

[XPac]

Agreed. At the same time though he should never be the type of character who is slaughtering random mooks a la wolverine.

At least in the capacity as an Avenger, I don't think Logan's really slaughered too many random mooks.

Aside from Secret Invasion (where literally everyone was wasting skrulls left and right) I'm not really sure Logan has actually killed too many people. On X-Force sure... but as an Avenger I think overall he's been fine. Which is why they keep re-inviting him to the team. He's worked out pretty well so far.

[Majinoaw]

At least in the capacity as an Avenger, I don't think Logan's really slaughered too many random mooks.

Aside from Secret Invasion (where literally everyone was wasting skrulls left and right) I'm not really sure Logan has actually killed too many people. On X-Force sure... but as an Avenger I think overall he's been fine. Which is why they keep re-inviting him to the team. He's worked out pretty well so far.

Go back and read the start of Larry Hamas run in Wolverine (issue 31)... and then tell me if he hasn't slaughtered too many random mooks.

But he has been pretty good on the Avengers... you and I do not disagree on that point.

As for Cap... sure Cap kills. He has also brutalized his friends and has suffered from a drug addiction. Why can't people see his flaws.

[Monty_Cristo]

They still aren't. None of those terms describe Wolverine. He's neither indiscriminate nor is he bloodthirsty.

save for someone who hasn't been read the entirety of Claremont's X-Men run. Logan's nickname was "psycho" for a reason. killing was go-to for conflict resolution. it's why Captain America threw him out of that plane in the early stages of Avengers vs X-Men. his time as a samurai might as well be a separate personality.

[Nomads1]

Honestly, I'd much rather count only on Cap and even Tony's perspective, than listen to Logan's. Lethal sollution's have proven 99% of the time to be his first choice in dealing with any problem. It's a quick and easy fix for him. Problem is, most of the times, it's an irreversible sollution (even if Marvel has made a joke of death). Even if I consider them ridiculously concieved and written, take into consideration the "great" stories/events of the last few years. Let's say anybody gave Logan the time of day in House of M. Yes, No more mutants could have been prevented (we'll never know. Wolverine's attempt to kill Wanda might have resulted in something worse), Logan would not have his memories back (which, IMHO, in hindsight could have been something good. For me, the end of Logan's aura of mystery was greatly responsible for the current sorry state of the character), Vulcan would not have reawakened, etc... However, also no Hope, and wasn't Wanda also a crucial part in the Phoenix's defeat? So, permenant sollutions may result in eventual destruction. Honestly, we'll never know, but I'd rather have a chance of finding out. That is why lethal sollutions are last case scenarios, and not first.
That's why, for me, despite what the powers that be have decided for the last few years, Logan will never be Avengers material. For me, it doesn't make sense. I really don't think his perspective is all that important.
(But, yes, I do belive that Cap has killed in the past, and that he's up to the job to do so again, if he finds it necessary.)

Peace

[XPac]

Honestly, I'd much rather count only on Cap and even Tony's perspective, then listen to Logan's. Lethal sollution's have proven 99% of the time to be his first choice in dealing with any problem. It's a quick and easy fix for him. Problem is, most of the times, it's an irreversible sollution (even if Marvel has made a joke of death). Even if I consider them ridiculously concieved and written, take into consideration the "great" stories/events of the last few years. Let's say anybody gave Logan the time of day in House of M. Yes, No more mutants could have been prevented (we'll never know. Wolverine's attempt to kill Wanda might have resulted in something worse), Logan would not have his memories back (which, IMHO, in hindsight could have been something good. For me, the end of Logan's aura of mystery was greatly responsible for the current sorry state of the character), Vulcan would not have reawakened, etc... However, also no Hope, and wasn't Wanda also a crucial part in the Phoenix's defeat? So, permenant sollutions may result in eventual destruction. Honestly, we'll never know, but I'd rather have a chance of finding out. That is why lethal sollutions are last case scenarios, and not first.
That's why, for me, despite what the powers that be have decided for the last few years, Logan will never be Avengers material. For me, it doesn't make sense. I really don't think his perspective is all that important.
(But, yes, I do belive that Cap has killed in the past, and that he's up to the job to do so again, if he finds it necessary.)

Peace

And most Avengers would agree that lethal sollutions are last case scenarios, not first. No one, including Steve and Stark, would suggest that they should go Logans way 100% of the time. The point is merely that his perspective often has value. If you disgree, that's fine... but I don't think there's anything wrong in the characters themselves recognizing that. And there's a flipside to the issue as well... the fact that Logan being with the Avengers potentially has the power to influence him the same way he has to potentially influence them.

And all that aside, at the end of the day he's still one of the most experienced and capable heroes on the planet, who has literally fought and experienced anything and everything there is to fight and experience in the marvel universe. That fact alone makes him worth having around.

If nothing else, there's huge value in creating a stronger working relationship between the Avengers and the headmaster of the Jean Grey school. Especially post AvX. That gives Logan access to a huge pool of resources and man power. Taken as a whole, he's a potentially very valuable resource.

If Logan is willing to work with the Avengers, then it's frankly stupid NOT to have him around at this point. And it's not like it hasn't worked out reasonably well so far. So any doubts Steve might have had about him being on board (and NA made it very clear he had some) were erased once he served with the man.

[destro]

Except for that time that Cap took a gun from an ULTIMATUM soldier and blew another guy away.

So, yeah, Cap kills. Deal with it.

That was an extreme circumstance. He had lost his shield and this guy was blowing away all of the hostages. He had a gun close at hand, grabbed it and shot the guy. Then he angsted over it for quite awhile, even though it was warranted.

I don't have issues with Cap killing when there is no other choice. But his extreme no kill policy went onto a "well I'll kill sometimes now even when I don't have to" postion.

A few words, or a couple of issues explaining his change of heart on this would have been appreciated.

[XPac]

That was an extreme circumstance. He had lost his shield and this guy was blowing away all of the hostages. He had a gun close at hand, grabbed it and shot the guy. Then he angsted over it for quite awhile, even though it was warranted.

I don't have issues with Cap killing when there is no other choice. But his extreme no kill policy went onto a "well I'll kill sometimes now even when I don't have to" postion.

A few words, or a couple of issues explaining his change of heart on this would have been appreciated.

Has he killed anyone where he didn't have to?

[destro]

Has he killed anyone where he didn't have to?

Well he threw that guy off of a train awhile back, I thought that was extreme overkill.

He also used to be extremely harsh against other heroes who killed, at least most of the time. Guys like Nick Fury seemed to get a pass.

Anyway I don't have a problem with his attitude changing a bit over time, I just would have liked to see more about why it did.

[Zen-aku]

save for someone who hasn't been read the entirety of Claremont's X-Men run. Logan's nickname was "psycho" for a reason. killing was go-to for conflict resolution. it's why Captain America threw him out of that plane in the early stages of Avengers vs X-Men. his time as a samurai might as well be a separate personality.

So your going to go to clarmont and ignore All the character development he's had since then.

i know the concept of people changing over time maybe a scary idea for you to wrap your head around but it dose happen