|
|
Post by DC-Fan on May 15, 2017 20:33:37 GMT
they sent a bunch of soldiers after him. Because he went to a university full of students and other civilians and thus endangered the lives of many civilians. General Ross knew that Banner would turn into the Hulk, which would endanger the lives of all those civilians at the university. That's why General Ross sent his soldiers to try to bring Banner in before he could become the Hulk and endanger the lives of all those civilians. And what happened. Banner turned into the Hulk. So General Ross was 100% correct. General Ross thought Banner could turn into the Hulk. And Banner did turn into the Hulk, just as General Ross suspected that he would. That's why it was important for the soldiers to bring Banner in before he could become the Hulk and endanger the lives of al those civilians at the university. And the soldiers tried to bring Banner in without using lethal force. But Banner turned into the Hulk and then slaughtered the U.S. soldiers. Those soldiers were brave young men and women who were just doing their duty trying to protect civilians from a dangerous monster, and the Hulk brutally slaughtered them. But did we see them dead? Did we see Orson Krennic dead in Rouge One? No, but we saw the planet that he was on destroyed. So we don't have to see him dead to know that he's dead. Same with the US soldiers that te Hulk brutally slaughtered. We see the Hulk throw part of the Army truck at their helicopter, their helicopter go into a tailspin, crash, and blow up in a fiery explosion. So we know that the Hulk brutally slaughtered them. the Accords put the responsibility onto the government that allowed them to travel into their borders. It wouldn't be on the Avengers. Before the Accords, responsibility fell to the Avengers and to the United States because they operated from inside the country. The USA didn't want to be held responsible for them. The Accords would've held the Avengers accountable to the elected representatives of the people. But Captain America didnt want the Avengers to be held responsible for the deaths and damages that they caused. Instead, Captain America wanted to be a tyrant (just like Hitler and Stalin) and wanted the Avengers to unilaterally decide what's best for the people (just like Hitler and Stalin wanted to unilaterally decide what's best for the people). |
|
|
|
Post by zoilus on May 15, 2017 20:40:39 GMT
they sent a bunch of soldiers after him. Because he went to a university full of students and other civilians and thus endangered the lives of many civilians. General Ross knew that Banner would turn into the Hulk, which would endanger the lives of all those civilians at the university. That's why General Ross sent his soldiers to try to bring Banner in before he could become the Hulk and endanger the lives of all those civilians. And what happened. Banner turned into the Hulk. So General Ross was 100% correct. General Ross thought Banner could turn into the Hulk. And Banner did turn into the Hulk, just as General Ross suspected that he would. That's why it was important for the soldiers to bring Banner in before he could become the Hulk and endanger the lives of al those civilians at the university. And the soldiers tried to bring Banner in without using lethal force. But Banner turned into the Hulk and then slaughtered the U.S. soldiers. Those soldiers were brave young men and women who were just doing their duty trying to protect civilians from a dangerous monster, and the Hulk brutally slaughtered them. But did we see them dead? Did we see Orson Krennic dead in Rouge One? No, but we saw the planet that he was on destroyed. So we don't have to see him dead to know that he's dead. Same with the US soldiers that te Hulk brutally slaughtered. We see the Hulk throw part of the Army truck at their helicopter, their helicopter go into a tailspin, crash, and blow up in a fiery explosion. So we know that the Hulk brutally slaughtered them. the Accords put the responsibility onto the government that allowed them to travel into their borders. It wouldn't be on the Avengers. Before the Accords, responsibility fell to the Avengers and to the United States because they operated from inside the country. The USA didn't want to be held responsible for them. The Accords would've held the Avengers accountable to the elected representatives of the people. But Captain America didnt want the Avengers to be held responsible for the deaths and damages that they caused. Instead, Captain America wanted to be a tyrant (just like Hitler and Stalin) and wanted the Avengers to unilaterally decide what's best for the people (just like Hitler and Stalin wanted to unilaterally decide what's best for the people). You ignored my last 3 posts here. Pussy. |
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on May 16, 2017 0:06:39 GMT
they sent a bunch of soldiers after him. Because he went to a university full of students and other civilians and thus endangered the lives of many civilians. General Ross knew that Banner would turn into the Hulk, which would endanger the lives of all those civilians at the university. That's why General Ross sent his soldiers to try to bring Banner in before he could become the Hulk and endanger the lives of all those civilians. And what happened. Banner turned into the Hulk. So General Ross was 100% correct. General Ross thought Banner could turn into the Hulk. And Banner did turn into the Hulk, just as General Ross suspected that he would. That's why it was important for the soldiers to bring Banner in before he could become the Hulk and endanger the lives of al those civilians at the university. And the soldiers tried to bring Banner in without using lethal force. But Banner turned into the Hulk and then slaughtered the U.S. soldiers. Those soldiers were brave young men and women who were just doing their duty trying to protect civilians from a dangerous monster, and the Hulk brutally slaughtered them. But did we see them dead? Did we see Orson Krennic dead in Rouge One? No, but we saw the planet that he was on destroyed. So we don't have to see him dead to know that he's dead. Same with the US soldiers that te Hulk brutally slaughtered. We see the Hulk throw part of the Army truck at their helicopter, their helicopter go into a tailspin, crash, and blow up in a fiery explosion. So we know that the Hulk brutally slaughtered them. the Accords put the responsibility onto the government that allowed them to travel into their borders. It wouldn't be on the Avengers. Before the Accords, responsibility fell to the Avengers and to the United States because they operated from inside the country. The USA didn't want to be held responsible for them. The Accords would've held the Avengers accountable to the elected representatives of the people. But Captain America didnt want the Avengers to be held responsible for the deaths and damages that they caused. Instead, Captain America wanted to be a tyrant (just like Hitler and Stalin) and wanted the Avengers to unilaterally decide what's best for the people (just like Hitler and Stalin wanted to unilaterally decide what's best for the people). Wow. You are the type of guy that would punch a person then say it was their fault because they were standing there when you were swinging you fist directly at their face. They provoked him into turning into the Hulk. You making it sound like he randomly turns into the Hulk. Never heard of a Rouge One. You saying that soldiers can't jump out of the helicopter? they are close to the ground. They aren't at the top of a tower that's over a mile high that was sniped by a space station. The Avengers wouldn't have been accountable for anything. The people above them would have been. |
|
|
|
Post by judgejosephdredd on May 16, 2017 0:27:52 GMT
Where in any of the films has that been made clear? On second thought, don't answer that because you're the guy who claimed Rogers joined the army in the first place to get chicks. It's pretty amusing how you view Captain America to be a vicious, disgusting tyrant in his cinematic ventures but look at DCEU's representation of Superman and Batman as respectable, squeaky clean, truly heroic, caring cinematic versions of their comic counterparts - More than a few of today's movie goers view MCU's Captain America as a better contemporary representation of the Superman character than of the DCEU's own who actually is a legal adaptation. Respected voice actor Maurice LaMarche who has been involved in many DC-related projects even thinks so and said so too in a podcast a year ago.
If you think Captain America in the movies is a tyrant I can only wonder what forces drove you to think that way. Captain America has not become a Nazi in the comics, he's been manipulated by Kobik into thinking he's been HYDRA since childhood with planted false memories and altered actual memories. It is also worth noting that HYDRA did not begin with The Nazi's, they were around centuries earlier, the association with the Nazi's just gave them public exposure but they've been around for much, much longer.
How can Bucky have legal responsibilities if he's been brainwashed and controlled by HYDRA where he has not had free will? Captain America has the strongest relationship with Bucky, they have been friends since they were children why shouldn't he have the right to his opinion and defend his friend who he knows has been used for HYDRA's scientific experiments?
No, I'm talking about fictional characters who exist in a fictional world. And because the jury won't know who Bucky is beyond face value and his association with HYDRA he will not get a fair trial and be sentenced to a harsh punishment in an instant. Cap knows Bucky's not a monster and didn't act on free will and wants to help him get better.
Bucky's trial would not be fair, the sheer fact that he was associated with HYDRA will cloud judgement easily and they'd find him guilty as sin. Not that Bucky would actually go to trial, in Civil War they just wanted him locked up in a super max prison under high watch.
No, because he understands others don't view Bucky the same way and be given an unfair trial. Not like Bucky would be taken to court, as the goal was to really capture him and get him to tell HYDRA's secrets.
Your argument is that The Avengers didn't stop them and that it was the U.S. military who did, this is not true as Iron Man was the one who prevented them from blowing up NYC by guiding the missile into the wormhole, which destroyed the mothership, and it was Black Widow who stopped the tesseract from keeping the wormhole opened.
|
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on May 16, 2017 0:28:19 GMT
And also, Superman only "surrendered" to the US Military because he was toying with them. At no point did he take them seriously and he walked away as soon as he felt he had nothing else to do there.
Batman getting the Batsignal is merely a sign of how incompetent Gordon and the GCPD are.
|
|
|
|
Post by judgejosephdredd on May 16, 2017 1:16:54 GMT
Let us also not forget, and hopefully the englightened DC-Fan can tell us all we're misinformed fools, that...
- Superman destroyed a military satellite because it was invading his privacy and he told them face to face he'd help on his own terms, not when they needed him.
- Clark Kent used Daily Planet resources to dig up information on Batman without Perry's approval and did it all on the clock, too.
- Superman left congress pretty soon after Luthor blew it up instead of staying to help more people out and confirming that he had no part in the bombing whatsoever. Had he done so there wouldn't have been so much bad press.
- Batman broke into a LexCorp research facility and brutally injured its security guards to steal the kryptonite shard.
- Batman didn't contact the GCPD about Martha Kent's abduction or whereabouts the second Alfred told him where she was, leaving him to do all the fighting, shootings, and stabing.
And that's not even the half of it...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2017 2:19:58 GMT
Ah, DC-Fan's still not taking his meds, I see.
It's amazing how someone who understands so little can just keep running his mouth.
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on May 16, 2017 3:15:00 GMT
They provoked him into turning into the Hulk. You making it sound like he randomly turns into the Hulk. That's irrelevant. If the soldiers could provoke Banner into turning the Hulk, then ordinary civilians could easily provoke Banner into turning into the Hulk. What if a meter maid gives Banner a parking citation for an expired parking meter? Is Banner going to get angry and turn into the Hulk and attack the meter maid? What if Banner is constantly late with his rent (like Luke Cage was) and Banner's landlord threatened to evict him? Is Banner going to get angry and turn into the Hulk and attack his landlord? The point is that Banner could be easily provoked by anyone and could turn into the Hulk anytime anywhere and when that happens, he's a danger to civilians who have the bad luck to be in the vicinity. That was the case at the university. Banner was irresponsible in going to the university during the day (when there are plenty of civilians around) and putting the lives of all those civilians at risk. That's why General Ross had a duty to protect civilians by trying to bring in Banner before Banner could turn into the Hulk and endanger the lives of all those civilians at the university. And the fact that Banner turned into the Hulk and then brutally slaughtered several U.S. soldiers who were just doing their duty trying to protect civilians from harm proves that Ross was correct to try to bring Banner in. But the Hulk brutally slaughtered several of the U.S. soldiers who were just doing their duty trying to protect civilians from harm. You saying that soldiers can't jump out of the helicopter? Not when the helicopter is spinning out of control and pummeling to the ground. They don't have enough time to put on a parachute. So they would make a huge splatter on the ground when they hit the ground. they are close to the ground. They high enough that impact with the ground, especially at the speed the helicopter was moving, would be fatal. Even jumping off a moving train would leave someone bloody and bruised. So jumping off a moving helicopter, which is much higher than a moving train, onto the ground would be fatal. The Avengers wouldn't have been accountable for anything. The people above them would have been.
The Avengers would be accountable for the deaths and damages that they caused. It's similar to if a police officer gets into a shootout with bank robbers in a bank and the police officer shoots and kills an innocent bystander. It's not the Police Commissioner or the Police Chief that's accountable. It's the officer who fire the shot who is held accountable and put on desk duty or administrative leave until IA can clear him.
But Captain America didn't want the Avengers to be held accountable for the civilians that died as a result of their actions, civilians who wouldn't have died if the Avengers hadn't been so reckless. Captain America wanted to be a tyrant (just like Hitler and Stalin) and wanted to have the power to unilaterally decide what's best for the people (just Hitler and Stalin unilaterally decided what was best for their people). |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on May 16, 2017 3:29:01 GMT
If Cap is a dictator for not wanting to be a slave, so are Batman and Superman. They only cooperate with the authorities when it suits them, and the rest of the time they thumb their noses at the authorities.
|
|
|
|
Post by zoilus on May 16, 2017 3:36:29 GMT
They provoked him into turning into the Hulk. You making it sound like he randomly turns into the Hulk. That's irrelevant. If the soldiers could provoke Banner into turning the Hulk, then ordinary civilians could easily provoke Banner into turning into the Hulk. What if a meter maid gives Banner a parking citation for an expired parking meter? Is Banner going to get angry and turn into the Hulk and attack the meter maid? What if Banner is constantly late with his rent (like Luke Cage was) and Banner's landlord threatened to evict him? Is Banner going to get angry and turn into the Hulk and attack his landlord? The point is that Banner could be easily provoked by anyone and could turn into the Hulk anytime anywhere and when that happens, he's a danger to civilians who have the bad luck to be in the vicinity. That was the case at the university. Banner was irresponsible in going to the university during the day (when there are plenty of civilians around) and putting the lives of all those civilians at risk. That's why General Ross had a duty to protect civilians by trying to bring in Banner before Banner could turn into the Hulk and endanger the lives of all those civilians at the university. And the fact that Banner turned into the Hulk and then brutally slaughtered several U.S. soldiers who were just doing their duty trying to protect civilians from harm proves that Ross was correct to try to bring Banner in. But the Hulk brutally slaughtered several of the U.S. soldiers who were just doing their duty trying to protect civilians from harm. You saying that soldiers can't jump out of the helicopter? Not when the helicopter is spinning out of control and pummeling to the ground. They don't have enough time to put on a parachute. So they would make a huge splatter on the ground when they hit the ground. they are close to the ground. They high enough that impact with the ground, especially at the speed the helicopter was moving, would be fatal. Even jumping off a moving train would leave someone bloody and bruised. So jumping off a moving helicopter, which is much higher than a moving train, onto the ground would be fatal. The Avengers wouldn't have been accountable for anything. The people above them would have been.
The Avengers would be accountable for the deaths and damages that they caused. It's similar to if a police officer gets into a shootout with bank robbers in a bank and the police officer shoots and kills an innocent bystander. It's not the Police Commissioner or the Police Chief that's accountable. It's the officer who fire the shot who is held accountable and put on desk duty or administrative leave until IA can clear him.
But Captain America didn't want the Avengers to be held accountable for the civilians that died as a result of their actions, civilians who wouldn't have died if the Avengers hadn't been so reckless. Captain America wanted to be a tyrant (just like Hitler and Stalin) and wanted to have the power to unilaterally decide what's best for the people (just Hitler and Stalin unilaterally decided what was best for their people). Do you ever read one of your rants and think "What the fuck am I DOING with my life???" |
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on May 16, 2017 3:48:37 GMT
How can Bucky have legal responsibilities if he's been brainwashed Being "brainwashed" isn't a legitimate excuse for his illegal actions (go read about Patty Hearst). Captain America has the strongest relationship with Bucky, they have been friends since they were children why shouldn't he have the right to his opinion and defend his friend who he knows has been used for HYDRA's scientific experiments? If Cap wants to sit behind Bucky at his trial, he has the right to do that. If Cap wants to hire the best lawyer there is to defend Bucky at hs trial, he hs the right to do that. But Cap doesn't have the right to unilaterally decide that Bucky isn't guilty and shouldn't be punished (those are questions for a jury and judge to decide) and Cap doesn't have the right to aid and abet a murderer to escape from the authorities. No, I'm talking about fictional characters who exist in a fictional world. So in the fictional world of the Avengers, the United States doesn't any have jury trials? because the jury won't know who Bucky is beyond face value and his association with HYDRA he will not get a fair trial Once again, juries aren't supposed to know the defendant. That's how jury trials work. In a trial, the prosecution presents their case to the jury and then the defense team gets to present their case the jury. So Bucky's lawyers would get to present their case to the jury. How is that not fair? Are you saying that in the fictional world of the Avengers, the United States doesn't have any jury trials? Cap knows Bucky's not a monster and didn't act on free will And Cap can testify to that at Bucky's trial. But Cap doesn't have the right to unilaterally decide that Bucky isn't guilty and shouldn't be punished (those are questions for a jury and judge to decide) and Cap doesnt have the right to aid and abet a murderer to escape from the authorities. Bucky's trial would not be fair In a trial, the prosecution presents their case to the jury and then the defense team gets to present their case the jury. So Bucky's lawyers would get to present their case to the jury. How is that not fair? Not that Bucky would actually go to trial, in Civil War they just wanted him locked up in a super max prison under high watch. He would probably be held in a prison without bail until and throughout the trial. O.J. was held in prison without bail until and throughout his trial and wasn't released from prison until the jury came back with a Not Guilty verdict. he understands others don't view Bucky the same way and be given an unfair trial So Captain America doesn't believe in the Constitutional right to a trial by a jury of one's peers. Sounds like Captain America really is a tyrant. Not like Bucky would be taken to court Bucky's a U.S. citizen. The last time I checked, the U.S. Constitution guarantees every citizen who is charged with a crime the right to a trial by a jury of one's peers. But in the fictional world of the Avengers, you're saying that the United States doesn't have any jury trials? Your argument is that The Avengers didn't stop them and that it was the U.S. military who did, this is not true My argument is that the Chitauri had no superpowers and were so weak that all it took was 1 nuclear missile launched by the military to defeat hundreds of Chitauri. That is 100% true. |
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on May 16, 2017 3:58:32 GMT
If Cap is a dictator for not wanting to be a slave, so are Batman and Superman. They only cooperate with the authorities when it suits them, and the rest of the time they thumb their noses at the authorities. The Sokovia Accords have nothing to do with slavery. The Sokovia Accords simply gives the UN oversight of the Avengers, meaning that the Avengers must report to the UN.
I have a boss that I report to. That doesn't make me a slave. A police sergeant reports to a police lieutenant who reports to a police captain who reports to a police chief who reports to a police commissioner. That doesn't make any of them slaves.
Everybody has a boss that they have to report to. But Captain America doesn't want to report to anyone because he wants to be a tyrant (just like Hitler and Stalin) and he wants to unilaterally decide what's best for the people (just like Hitler and Stalin unilaterally decided what was best for their people).
|
|
|
|
Post by zoilus on May 16, 2017 3:58:33 GMT
Being "brainwashed" isn't a legitimate excuse for his illegal actions (go read about Patty Hearst). If Cap wants to sit behind Bucky at his trial, he has the right to do that. If Cap wants to hire the best lawyer there is to defend Bucky at hs trial, he hs the right to do that. But Cap doesn't have the right to unilaterally decide that Bucky isn't guilty and shouldn't be punished (those are questions for a jury and judge to decide) and Cap doesn't have the right to aid and abet a murderer to escape from the authorities. So in the fictional world of the Avengers, the United States doesn't any have jury trials? Once again, juries aren't supposed to know the defendant. That's how jury trials work. In a trial, the prosecution presents their case to the jury and then the defense team gets to present their case the jury. So Bucky's lawyers would get to present their case to the jury. How is that not fair? Are you saying that in the fictional world of the Avengers, the United States doesn't have any jury trials? And Cap can testify to that at Bucky's trial. But Cap doesn't have the right to unilaterally decide that Bucky isn't guilty and shouldn't be punished (those are questions for a jury and judge to decide) and Cap doesnt have the right to aid and abet a murderer to escape from the authorities. In a trial, the prosecution presents their case to the jury and then the defense team gets to present their case the jury. So Bucky's lawyers would get to present their case to the jury. How is that not fair? He would probably be held in a prison without bail until and throughout the trial. O.J. was held in prison without bail until and throughout his trial and wasn't released from prison until the jury came back with a Not Guilty verdict. So Captain America doesn't believe in the Constitutional right to a trial by a jury of one's peers. Sounds like Captain America really is a tyrant. It's weird how much thought you put into movies you supposedly loathe. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on May 16, 2017 4:26:58 GMT
If Cap is a dictator for not wanting to be a slave, so are Batman and Superman. They only cooperate with the authorities when it suits them, and the rest of the time they thumb their noses at the authorities. The Sokovia Accords have nothing to do with slavery. The Sokovia Accords simply gives the UN oversight of the Avengers, meaning that the Avengers must report to the UN.
I have a boss that I report to. That doesn't make me a slave. A police sergeant reports to a police lieutenant who reports to a police captain who reports to a police chief who reports to a police commissioner. That doesn't make any of them slaves.
Everybody has a boss that they have to report to. But Captain America doesn't want to report to anyone because he wants to be a tyrant (just like Hitler and Stalin) and he wants to unilaterally decide what's best for the people (just like Hitler and Stalin unilaterally decided what was best for their people).
The Accords are about taking the Avengers and making them nothing but living weapons instead of actually being able to help people. It's entirely about making sure they can't do their jobs effectively. It's the same with Batman and Superman, they thumb their noses at this sort of stuff and only cooperate when it suits them. If you're okay with Batman and Superman, you have to be fine with the Avengers otherwise you're a hypocrite. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2017 4:38:26 GMT
The Sokovia Accords have nothing to do with slavery. The Sokovia Accords simply gives the UN oversight of the Avengers, meaning that the Avengers must report to the UN.
I have a boss that I report to. That doesn't make me a slave. A police sergeant reports to a police lieutenant who reports to a police captain who reports to a police chief who reports to a police commissioner. That doesn't make any of them slaves.
Everybody has a boss that they have to report to. But Captain America doesn't want to report to anyone because he wants to be a tyrant (just like Hitler and Stalin) and he wants to unilaterally decide what's best for the people (just like Hitler and Stalin unilaterally decided what was best for their people).
The Accords are about taking the Avengers and making them nothing but living weapons instead of actually being able to help people. It's entirely about making sure they can't do their jobs effectively. It's the same with Batman and Superman, they thumb their noses at this sort of stuff and only cooperate when it suits them. If you're okay with Batman and Superman, you have to be fine with the Avengers otherwise you're a hypocrite. I think we both know he is. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2017 4:39:39 GMT
The Sokovia Accords have nothing to do with slavery. The Sokovia Accords simply gives the UN oversight of the Avengers, meaning that the Avengers must report to the UN.
I have a boss that I report to. That doesn't make me a slave. A police sergeant reports to a police lieutenant who reports to a police captain who reports to a police chief who reports to a police commissioner. That doesn't make any of them slaves.
Everybody has a boss that they have to report to. But Captain America doesn't want to report to anyone because he wants to be a tyrant (just like Hitler and Stalin) and he wants to unilaterally decide what's best for the people (just like Hitler and Stalin unilaterally decided what was best for their people).
The Accords are about taking the Avengers and making them nothing but living weapons instead of actually being able to help people. It's entirely about making sure they can't do their jobs effectively. It's the same with Batman and Superman, they thumb their noses at this sort of stuff and only cooperate when it suits them. If you're okay with Batman and Superman, you have to be fine with the Avengers otherwise you're a hypocrite. I think we both know he is. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2017 4:57:18 GMT
What? DC-Fan a hypocryte? No it cant be.
|
|
|
|
Post by judgejosephdredd on May 16, 2017 5:58:55 GMT
DC-Fan you keep acting like Bucky had full control over his actions as Winter Soldier, when all the information shown in both TWS and CW state he did not have control over his actions and that it was all HYDRA's doing. It's not a Darth Vader situation where the character was emotionally manipulated to join the dark side but hypnotized and experimented on to be a weapon, in short no free will to act on their own.
Captain America couldn't wait for Bucky to stand trial, or continue to fight for his freedom because Zemo made that impossible when he infiltrated the prison and set him free and triggered a code that set his Winter Soldier side off. Steve and Sam rescue him, and try to find out who Zemo is and what he's up to. They tried to tell everybody else something was up, but they were deadest on Bucky going back to jail.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2017 6:40:37 GMT
DC-Fan you keep acting like Bucky had full control over his actions as Winter Soldier, when all the information shown in both TWS and CW state he did not have control over his actions and that it was all HYDRA's doing. It's not a Darth Vader situation where the character was emotionally manipulated to join the dark side but hypnotized and experimented on to be a weapon, in short no free will to act on their own. Captain America couldn't wait for Bucky to stand trial, or continue to fight for his freedom because Zemo made that impossible when he infiltrated the prison and set him free and triggered a code that set his Winter Soldier side off. Steve and Sam rescue him, and try to find out who Zemo is and what he's up to. They tried to tell everybody else something was up, but they were deadest on Bucky going back to jail. I think DC-fan does actually know all this. He's just unwilling to accept that this generation has seen Captain America become the new Superman to a whole generation of children, while this generation's Superman is just irredeemable shit. |
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on May 16, 2017 7:22:15 GMT
The Accords are about taking the Avengers and making them nothing but living weapons instead of actually being able to help people. It's entirely about making sure they can't do their jobs effectively. No, the Sokovia Accords are about making sure the Avengers do their jobs better and more effectively and not endangering civilian lives by doing something reckless, like chasing Crossbones through a crowded market where civilians could be hurt or killed. And that's how the people in the building got killed when Scarlett Witch set off the bomb that blew out the side of the building. Because the Avengers recklessly chased Crossbones through a crowded market where civilians would be hurt or killed. Resulting in the deaths of the people in that building who wouldn't have died if not for the reckless actions of the Avengers. Also, your comparison of the Sokovia Accords to slavery is weak. None of the Avengers were forced to sign the Sokovia Accords. If they didn't want to sign the Sokovia Accords, then they would be allowed to retire and quit the Avengers without any reprisal from the government. I've never heard of any slavery in which a slave was allowed to retire and quit being a slave if he didn't want to be a slave anymore so your comparison of the Sokovia Accords to slavery is weak. |
|
