Didn;t we already spray for Skrulls? Or was that some other board I frequent...
Didn;t we already spray for Skrulls? Or was that some other board I frequent...
"You cannot win, mailman Mike. If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine."
We did indeed spray for them. They have developed new and improved anti-bodies to combat our poisons. Due to their shape changing nature they are quick to adapt. We may very well be overwhelmed soon. The end is nigh.Originally Posted by Transmetropolitan
You may say I'm a dreamer...but I'm not the only one.
Venom: I want to bite their heads off and shove my tongue down their neck holes.
Songbird: Why?
Venom: So I can lick out their hearts.
If he was against it then shouldn't he have opposed it like you were suggesting the other heroes do? As for the Illuminati, you're right, I misread something in another forum that made it sound like they deliberately started the Civil War, etc. Still, he used the situation to put his own agenda into play which resulted in criminal actions on the part of SHRA heroes.Originally Posted by Powersurge
First off, please don't put words in my mouth. I never said any govt. was pristine and innocent. Secondly, I'm refering to the comic books where you can get people who are "innocent and pristine". Try to keep the argument within the scope of what we're talking about.Originally Posted by Powersurge
We have tried rank and file soldiers as war criminals, specifically the ones who worked in the death camps. I never mentioned anything about the average citizens though, so again stop putting words in my mouth. To make it perfectly clear, I hold individuals who are aware of criminal behaviours going on, and who are in a position to say or do something about it but don't, as the bad guys. Even worse are those who take advantage of the situation for personal gain.Originally Posted by Powersurge
Which I agree with. IM has been responsible for the death of Goliath; the impressing of Cloud 9 (a minor) into military service; cloning of an individual (without his permission) for use as a weapon and the imprisonment of people without trial. That is what I am judging him by.Originally Posted by Powersurge
I never thought of AF as lackeys since they have disagreed with the govt. on many occassions, and have even refused funding to keep from becoming such. I don't hold all the pro-reg supers as lackeys either, but I do consider those like She-hulk (a defence lawyer yet) as such, since she, of all people, should be standing against an Act that violates the rights of the individuals involved.Originally Posted by Powersurge
Quite true.Originally Posted by Powersurge
My basic point with that post was that your posts show a tendency towards extremes. For example, one exaggeration is enough to make you leave the thread.Originally Posted by Powersurge
Another:
It looks like it goes from either absolutely corrupt to 'pristine and innocent'. It can't be quasi-corrupt. The diet Coke of corrupt.Originally Posted by Powersurge
We're not so different, you and I. I know I go to extremes, too. A little bit. Hence why exaggeration above.
- Le Messor
"I don't know why I go to extremes--
It's either too high or too low,
There ain't no in-betweens."
- Billy Joel
P.S. Skrull spray doesn't work.
Can it be the Cherry Coke of corrupt, or is that too corrupt?Originally Posted by Le Messor
Going to extremes is a sure sign of being a Skrull. OMG, Powersurge is a Skrull too!Originally Posted by Le Messor
Shhhhh. Don't tell... or we'll replace you too.Originally Posted by Legerd
What thread have I left as a result of a single (or many, for that matter) exaggeration?!Originally Posted by Le Messor
Originally Posted by PowersurgeIt certainly can be quasi-corrupt. The U.S. government of Marvel CW for instance is "quasi-corrupt"... and/or "quasi-straight" straight dependin gon how one decides to look at it.Originally Posted by Le Messor
So, if you can pretty well guaren-damn-tee that you'll find corruption in any government, how can a person a person of your inclination serve any government? Based on personal bias, inclination, what issues are important to you and which are not? Do you launch a thorough investigation and oppose the government in question if it is found to be (based on whatever criteria), say, 50.125% corrupt, but not if it's only, say, 49.95% corrupt?
Corruption is corruption. And if all men are to be held accountable for the doings of their State, or at least some component of it, than all men are equally guilty.
To reiterrate, what I said was "If a person knowingly serves under a corrupt power when they have a choice, then they are just as corrupt." Most people serve their gov't in the belief it is just and honest. In any gov't there are corrupt individuals, that doesn't make the entire gov't corrupt. However, if the gov't was, let's say Dr. Doom's, then to willingly subject your countrymen to unjust imprisonment or acts of cruelty by Doom's orders makes you corrupt.Originally Posted by Powersurge
How can an individual "be held accountable for doings of their State" if they can't affect their gov't in its day-to-day activities? While in some countries the average person can vote for a political party, sign petitions, hold protests, sue or even accuse politicians under the law, that same person can't walk into the Capital and start making changes as he/she sees fit. Most people stand against what they see as gov't corruption by one of the above mentioned ways. To take the example of the Latverian gov't, how can a local peasant be held accountable for the crimes of Dr. Doom when he/she wouldn't be able to do anything to stop them, assuming the person was even aware of them?
Sounds about right to me.Originally Posted by Legerd
Originally Posted by PowersurgeThis one...Originally Posted by Powersurge
But... wait... you're still here?!? Now I'm confused.
Or just dumb. It's not fair beating me with ur smartz.
Okay, you didn't leave; but you didn't respond to the post, either. (Beyond saying: 'the first line is an exaggeration'.) It looks like you didn't read the rest of it, based on: "... that makes it very difficult to even bother reading, let alone responding, to the rest of your post." and not responding to the rest of the post.
- Le Messor
"He is the Extreme!"
- Twister
It logically follows that if you believe a government is shot through with evil, it should be overthrown and replaced by something better. If I seem to be jumping to extremes, it is likely because it seems that your view is that a single (bad) law makes a government corruptOriginally Posted by Le Messor
Sounds fair enough to me, and a far cry from starting a CW to boot.Originally Posted by Le Messor
Problem is, you can't 'work within' that law without doing all those things Del accused Stark of (above). That's how the law works.Originally Posted by Le Messor
If you obey the law, then yes, you become a clone of Stark.
[/quote]
No. I'm not saying that model 2 is good because model 1 is good.
In fact, what I've been saying all along is that "the law" (as a general body of legislation, of which the SRA is but one small, non-essential, and new/unrefined part) and the system are good, and that, as a result, this one isolated law can be overturned or ammended with enough will. Thus, a civil war shouldn't be considered one's first and only option.
And you can support the system without supporting every particular piece of legisaltion on the books and being a "clone" of those who drafted the SRA.
I didn't expect an answer so soon! Dude, get some sleep!
Aha! I think we've found the source of the misunderstanding.Originally Posted by Powersurge
What I've been saying is that the SHRA (Stark In-Law Remix) is bad, and that I don't support it; not that it makes the government whole government corrupt. Despite the occasional Homer-inspired outburst.
-Le Messor
"Even a prostitute can’t find work in a town full of nymphomaniacs."
Well, admittedly, I work nights, but for cripes sake, it's already 8 pm here!!Originally Posted by Le Messor
That's too early in the morning to be up.Originally Posted by Powersurge
(Sorry, I thought it'd be about 3am or something.)
- Le Messor
"What time is it? Tuesday? That's too early."