|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 5, 2017 21:51:54 GMT
So does Batman. At least Howard's inventions are because he's contracted to build and design that sort of stuff.
No, if Howard Stark was contracted to build those weapons of mass destruction, then he would be contractually obligated to turn them over to the government. But he didn't. He kept them in his private vault at his home. And Batman does the same thing, except he's worse because he wasn't even contracted to build stuff like that. Howard had inventions he was working on that got stolen. Try harder Ken.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Nov 5, 2017 22:06:33 GMT
No, if Howard Stark was contracted to build those weapons of mass destruction, then he would be contractually obligated to turn them over to the government. But he didn't. He kept them in his private vault at his home. And Batman does the same thing, except he's worse because he wasn't even contracted to build stuff like that. Batman doesn't build weapons of mass destruction. Batarangs and Bat-smoke bombs aren't weapons of mass destruction. Howard Stark builds weapons that can destroy an entire city. Those are weapons of mass destruction. And Howard Stark keeps them in his private vault at his home. Like I said, if your neighbor built a weapon that could destroy the entire city and kept it in his private vault at home, you would consider him a terrorist and you would call DHS to remove the weapon from your neighborhood. Howard Stark kept those weapons of mass destruction in his private vault at his home for his own use so Howard Stark was basically a terrorist. Howard had inventions he was working on that got stolen. His weapons of mass destruction were stolen because, instead of building them on a government-secured facility located far away from a civilian-populated area, he illegally kept them in his private vault at home for his own use.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 5, 2017 22:44:24 GMT
And Batman does the same thing, except he's worse because he wasn't even contracted to build stuff like that. Batman doesn't build weapons of mass destruction. Yes he does. Plenty of Bat Weapons could be used for that, as well as the illegal military hardware he keeps.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Nov 5, 2017 22:44:47 GMT
Ah, here we go again. DC-Fan, please-- please!--I'm begging you, don't go on making threads like this and the "Marvel fans hate our servicemen" one. You know I told you my thoughts on that, and you're only adding fuel to a needless fire with this new thread. You're imputing evil to a movie company. Think about that--and please do, please ponder it, because even if you don't like the company's product, even if you think it's lousy, it does not hold that the company, its productions, or anything associated with it "likes terrorists." Let me give you an example: let's say that this fictional character really is a terrorist. (I don't know one way or the other, not having seen the film[s?] in question, but you certainly haven't proved it via your example, especially when the example is viewed in the context that it's based on comic books.) Arguendo, he is, but there is no logical leap between that claim and the claim that "MCU likes terrorists." There are many alternative explanations (assuming, again, arguendo that he is a terrorist, which I do not believe): the writer[s} didn't think he was one (rightly or wrongly), the writer did but the director didn't, the writer and director did but the company as a whole didn't, etc. You're making an unwarranted logical leap based on a shaky premise. That is not very solid ground on which to post something that you know will offend many people and fuel this utterly ridiculous DC vs. Marvel "war." You know that I've defended your right to speech here and that I have argued that the burden of proof should be on those who argue that a thread should be taken down, not on the OP of said thread. I stand by what I wrote, and I don't think this thread should be removed from on-high. But think about your actions. Think something through before you say, write, or post it, especially when you know that you'll incite others. That is a principal rule of human behavior and interaction that (I hope) we all learned in childhood. Err on the side of understanding.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Nov 5, 2017 23:49:34 GMT
This almost surely won't play out well but I'll attempt to give it a chance before it inevitably falls apart. 1st, contrary to the lies by seahawksraawk00 - "you have the gall to say Marvel fans like terrorists?", nowhere in my OP did I say Marvel fans like terrorists or did I even use the phrase "Marvel fans" or "MCU fans". I wrote that "MCU tries to make Howard Stark seem like a hero. But Howard Stark built and stored weapons of mass destruction in his private vault.", which is what was shown in the Agent Carter TV show.
2nd, you recently started a thread on the DCEU board about JL having low estimated projections and when poelzig objected to that thread, you justified it by saying that you were posting facts. Well, I'm just posting facts about something that was shown on the TV show. But as soon an MCU fan (the same MCU fan who has called me "a fuckin' moron" about 30 times and in this thread has called me a "Worthless piece of shit") objects to my post, which is 100% factual, you threaten to delete my post.
So I ask again: 1. Are threads that don't put MCU on a pedestal prohibited just because MCU fans can't handle the truth? 2. Do your rules about keeping this board civil not apply to MCU fans?
The thread I made was just about box office tracking figures and I linked to a thread that contained that information. It was never something that was supposed to provoke people and cause problems in the first place. This thread is opinionated and you obviously are trying to provoke people with a thread title that says "Why does the MCU like terrorists" when they clearly don't hence them being considered bad guys in Iron Man and you could have simply have titled this "Why are they making Howard Stark out to be a hero?". I won't actually delete the thread unless it becomes nothing but arguing.
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Nov 5, 2017 23:59:51 GMT
Howard Stark built weapons with the intent that they would be used by the good guys to defeat evil. The good guys are either the U.S. government or the U.N.
By calling Howard Stark a terrorist, you’re also calling the U.S. government and the U.N. terrorist organizations. You are an enabler of the forces of evil.
Every super hero, both Marvel and DC, would spit in your general direction.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Nov 6, 2017 0:19:34 GMT
1st, contrary to the lies by seahawksraawk00 - "you have the gall to say Marvel fans like terrorists?", nowhere in my OP did I say Marvel fans like terrorists or did I even use the phrase "Marvel fans" or "MCU fans". I wrote that "MCU tries to make Howard Stark seem like a hero. But Howard Stark built and stored weapons of mass destruction in his private vault.", which is what was shown in the Agent Carter TV show.
2nd, you recently started a thread on the DCEU board about JL having low estimated projections and when poelzig objected to that thread, you justified it by saying that you were posting facts. Well, I'm just posting facts about something that was shown on the TV show. But as soon an MCU fan (the same MCU fan who has called me "a fuckin' moron" about 30 times and in this thread has called me a "Worthless piece of shit") objects to my post, which is 100% factual, you threaten to delete my post.
So I ask again: 1. Are threads that don't put MCU on a pedestal prohibited just because MCU fans can't handle the truth? 2. Do your rules about keeping this board civil not apply to MCU fans?
This thread is opinionated and you obviously are trying to provoke people with a thread title that says "Why does the MCU like terrorists" when they clearly don't hence them being considered bad guys in Iron Man and you could have simply have titled this "Why are they making Howard Stark out to be a hero?". This thread isn't opinion. I'm just describing what was shown in the Agent Carter TV show. I didn't write the script for the show. MCU's writers did. So if people don't like what happened in the show, then they should complain to the show's writers instead of making personal attacks against me.
OK, since you didn't like the title, I've changed the title.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Nov 6, 2017 0:21:40 GMT
DC-FanHow about changing it to what scabab suggested, "Why are they making Howard Stark out to be a hero?"
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Nov 6, 2017 0:24:37 GMT
Howard Stark built weapons with the intent that they would be used by the good guys to defeat evil. No, Howard Stark didn't intend for those weapons to be used by the U.S. government or the U.N. If he did, then he would've turned the weapons over to the government or the U.N. But he kept them in a private vault at his home because he intended them for his own use. So Howard Stark is basically a terrorist. By calling Howard Stark a terrorist, you’re also calling the U.S. government and the U.N. terrorist organizations. No, because neither the U.S. government nor the U.N. approved of or sanctioned for Howard Stark to build or keep those weapons of mass destruction. In fact, the government had issued an arrest warrant for Howard Stark so Howard Stark was a fugitive from the law, just like Steve Rogers would be several decades later. So even the U.S. government, which issued an arrest warrant for Howard Stark, considered Howard Stark to be a criminal. And I agree with the U.S. government that Howard Stark was a criminal. Howard Stark was basically a terrorist who built and kept weapons of mass destruction in his private vault at home for his own use.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2017 0:33:52 GMT
Guess what? No one cares or believes you.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 6, 2017 0:51:34 GMT
No, Howard Stark didn't intend for those weapons to be used by the U.S. government or the U.N. If he did, then he would've turned the weapons over to the government or the U.N. But he kept them in a private vault at his home because He was still working on them and they weren't complete. Yeah they did. Once they realized he'd been framed they called the whole thing off and were fine with him doing his stuff.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Nov 6, 2017 1:00:06 GMT
No, Howard Stark didn't intend for those weapons to be used by the U.S. government or the U.N. If he did, then he would've turned the weapons over to the government or the U.N. But he kept them in a private vault at his home because He was still working on them and they weren't complete. He wasn't working on them for the government because the government has secure facilities far away from civilian-populated areas where they develop their weapons. He was working on it illegally in his home, in a populated civilian area, because he had no intention of turning it over to the government and every intention of keeping it for his own use. Howard Stark was basically a terrorist who built and kept weapons of mass destruction in his home for his own use.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Nov 6, 2017 1:03:37 GMT
1st, contrary to the lies by seahawksraawk00 - "you have the gall to say Marvel fans like terrorists?", nowhere in my OP did I say Marvel fans like terrorists or did I even use the phrase "Marvel fans" or "MCU fans". I wrote that "MCU tries to make Howard Stark seem like a hero. But Howard Stark built and stored weapons of mass destruction in his private vault.", which is what was shown in the Agent Carter TV show.
2nd, you recently started a thread on the DCEU board about JL having low estimated projections and when poelzig objected to that thread, you justified it by saying that you were posting facts. Well, I'm just posting facts about something that was shown on the TV show. But as soon an MCU fan (the same MCU fan who has called me "a fuckin' moron" about 30 times and in this thread has called me a "Worthless piece of shit") objects to my post, which is 100% factual, you threaten to delete my post.
So I ask again: 1. Are threads that don't put MCU on a pedestal prohibited just because MCU fans can't handle the truth? 2. Do your rules about keeping this board civil not apply to MCU fans?
The thread I made was just about box office tracking figures and I linked to a thread that contained that information. It was never something that was supposed to provoke people and cause problems in the first place. This thread is opinionated and you obviously are trying to provoke people with a thread title that says "Why does the MCU like terrorists" when they clearly don't hence them being considered bad guys in Iron Man and you could have simply have titled this "Why are they making Howard Stark out to be a hero?". I won't actually delete the thread unless it becomes nothing but arguing. All due respect, you have to acknowledge that this is a consistent pattern with DC-Fan. He overdue for at least a temporary ban.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 6, 2017 1:28:44 GMT
He was still working on them and they weren't complete. He wasn't working on them for the government Yeah he was, and his own lab is more secure than Government facilities from the 1940s. Put them in a Government lab they'd have gotten stolen much faster.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Nov 6, 2017 1:34:27 GMT
He wasn't working on them for the government Yeah he was, and his own lab is more secure than Government facilities from the 1940s. Put them in a Government lab they'd have gotten stolen much faster. No, he wasn't working on it for the Government. Also, Government labs in addition to being more secure than anything Howard Stark had are also more safer because the Government develops their weapons in a remote location away from civilian-populated areas so that civilians don't get hurt in case there's an accident in the lab. Stark's home is in a civilian-populated area so many civilians could've been hurt if there was an accident in the lab so the Government would never authorize Stark to build the weapons at his home.
Stark built the weapons at his him because he had no intention of turning the weapons over to the Government and because he didn't care if civilians get hurt if there was an accident in the lab. Stark had every intention of keeping the weapons for his own use. Howard Stark was basically a terrorist.
|
|
|
Post by merh on Nov 6, 2017 2:00:14 GMT
MCU tries to make Howard Stark seem like a hero. But Howard Stark built and stored weapons of mass destruction in his private vault.
Imagine if your neighbor built and stored a weapon of mass destruction in his private vault at home. You would consider your neighbor a terrorist and you would call DHS to come and remove his weapons of mass destruction and arrest him for being a terrorist. So why is MCU trying to make a terrorist like Howard Stark seem like a hero? Howard worked for the government. He couldn't turn weapons over that didn't function. He was portrayed as brilliant, but Tony is more so. He worked with the SSR which became SHIELD & was a weapons manufacturer. You saying Remington Arms is a terrorist group for selling weapons?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2017 2:03:22 GMT
Hey, DC-Fan, how come you haven't replied to me?
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 6, 2017 2:08:13 GMT
Yeah he was, and his own lab is more secure than Government facilities from the 1940s. Put them in a Government lab they'd have gotten stolen much faster. No, he wasn't working on it for the Government.
Yes he is. And his lab is more secure than anything they have. They knew this and trusted him.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Nov 6, 2017 3:40:47 GMT
Hey, DC-Fan, how come you haven't replied to me? Aye. Same goes for me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2017 3:45:02 GMT
Hey, DC-Fan, how come you haven't replied to me? Aye. Same goes for me. I'd love to see what happens if he ever worked up the guts to try saying even half the crap he spews on here to someone's face.
|
|