|
Post by Nutcase65 on Mar 15, 2007 12:59:31 GMT -5
Ahhh crud,... He joined up before he made the newscast. Dangit.
Which means aiding those against the act. So yes he has commited a criminal act
However,
At the point Iron Man says to bring him in, he didn't know that Peter had already joined. He may have guessed, he may have thought it, but he did not know it. So he still seems to only be going off of what was said.
On the off hand, if you are refering to the damage caused when Spidey and IM scrapped. IM tried to put that off on Pete initially, but Tony started that fight, and at that point Spidey had done NOTHING against the law. All he had done was point out that he had made the wrong choice.
|
|
|
Post by balok on Mar 15, 2007 16:20:47 GMT -5
Tony was registered at that point but he was not a government employee. He was not head of SHIELD nor did the Initiative then exist. Remember that even now, being a registered hero does not make one a licensed hero or an employee of SHIELD.
Now, Tony might have presumed from Spidey's attack on him, subsequent disappearance, and then highly public change of stance that he was a member of the resistance. In that case, his order might have been "bring him in for questioning" - except they weren't really questioning heroes then, they were pitching them into 42 without arraignment or legal representation. It is not necessary a criminal act to speak out against a law.
Spider-Man discovered that unregistered captives were being held for life in "42" (according to Frontline #11, an attempt by Tony to scare heroes into registering - as of the end of Civil War "42" is only for villains, we are told). Believing the threat, Peter tried to leave Stark Tower with his Aunt and his wife, and it was then that Tony attacked him.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Mar 15, 2007 17:11:40 GMT -5
Actually, depending on when this takes place, there is a chance he has already seen Peter in action (IM #14). However even if it's before that let's examine the facts: Peter vanishes into the sewer after scrapping with Iron Man, and then two Thunderbolt corpses pop up with bullets in the head and Peter has vanished? Then Punisher is shown to be working with the Secret Av engers? Tony's not a dumb guy.
Not true, Spidey started the fight. Yes, Tony rather dramatically tackled him through a wall but they then proceeded to have a civil, normal conversation. Spidey instigated the fight by smashing Tony through a wall.
Actually, at this point he was most definitely operating government sanctioned, leader of the PRESIDENTIAL SUPER HERO TASK FORCE.
Well ignoring that all the evidence indicates Peter could simply have walked out had he not lost his temper with Tony, ignoring that Brevoort says the convo in ASM 535 has been retconned, Cap AND Spidey know it's for villains in CW6 and neither seem too surprised....
...
|
|
|
Post by Nutcase65 on Mar 15, 2007 18:34:17 GMT -5
Actually, depending on when this takes place, there is a chance he has already seen Peter in action (IM #14). However even if it's before that let's examine the facts: Peter vanishes into the sewer after scrapping with Iron Man, and then two Thunderbolt corpses pop up with bullets in the head and Peter has vanished? Then Punisher is shown to be working with the Secret Av engers? Tony's not a dumb guy. A Plausable argument, except if that were the case wouldn't Tony have already given that order. Not waitning until Spidey got on TV? Not true, Spidey started the fight. Yes, Tony rather dramatically tackled him through a wall but they then proceeded to have a civil, normal conversation. Spidey instigated the fight by smashing Tony through a wall. Doomsie,..c'mon now. Stark comes in doing his sound barrier thing, which he only does when he's about to whop somebody,.. but that aside. If I, a simple nutcase, come up and knock you , Doctor Doom, through a wall, haven't I started a fight with you? I know all you fellers up north do things different than us hicks doen here, but generally if you knock someone through a wall, you've started a fight That was something that Stark did that ticked me off. "We'll just ignore all the damage you just caused" Reminds me of Beverly Hills Cop when Eddie murphy gets thrown out of a window and the cops arrest him for disorderly conduct. "What do you do if someone throws you from a moving car, arrest them for jaywalking?"
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on Mar 15, 2007 19:45:06 GMT -5
So Brevoort says ASM 535 has been retconned away? (Source please?) This is one of my biggest problems with CW, even the people working on it can't seem to come up with one unified version of what happened. If they are retconning ASM 535, they better retcon practically everything Stark says in ASM the last year, because it definitely portrays him as being a heartless manipulator who will do anything to win this war. And how exactly do they plan to retcon it? Unles they plan to send everybody who bought ASM 535 a "revised issue", how are the fans supposed to know that the powers-that-be no longer consider those scenes valid? It's simply ludicrous. They screwed up, plain and simple. They should let the scenes stand. Let it be like "Rashoman".... And the fight between Tony and Peter? Again, depends on which book you read. In ASM, Tony started it. In CW, Peter is much more to blame. Which one is right? Who knows? I don't even care any more, it's just one more piece in a very messy puzzle.
|
|
|
Post by balok on Mar 15, 2007 20:43:53 GMT -5
Not true, Spidey started the fight. Yes, Tony rather dramatically tackled him through a wall but they then proceeded to have a civil, normal conversation. Spidey instigated the fight by smashing Tony through a wall. This is pretty tortured logic. As nutcase65 says, you slam somebody through a wall, you've started a fight with them. If somebody slams me through a wall, and I manage to hold onto consciousness, you'd better believe I'd know they'd started a fight with me, whether or not a brief conversation intervened. I'd be looking at them as hostile no matter what they said. Actually, at this point he was most definitely operating government sanctioned, leader of the PRESIDENTIAL SUPER HERO TASK FORCE. Us old guys don't have such good memories. Got a book and issue number cite for this statement? Well ignoring that all the evidence indicates Peter could simply have walked out had he not lost his temper with Tony, ignoring that Brevoort says the convo in ASM 535 has been retconned, Cap AND Spidey know it's for villains in CW6 and neither seem too surprised... He lost his temper because Tony slammed him through a wall. I'd lose my temper, too. Where did Brevoort retcon that conversation away? I don't remember it, but, hey, old guy, not such a good memory. And even if he did retcon it away - I have to say that writing something in the books, and then explaining that it didn't happen that way in an interview later, is poor writing. If a retcon must happen, it should happen in a book.
|
|
|
Post by Nutcase65 on Mar 15, 2007 21:21:12 GMT -5
Balok, I think he is probably talking about when IM is standing in the office of the Pres at the very beginning. Of course he is talking about bringing Cap in, but I think it is pretty much implied in this,... and in IM's leadership status in field missions,... that he is acting in an official capacity.
To reference that wall thing. I did remember one time where getting slammed through the wall is not a fight stater. At some of my family reunions when your 2nd cousin does it, it can be considered a mating ritual.
Maybe Tony was trying to pick Peter up?
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Mar 16, 2007 12:18:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by balok on Mar 16, 2007 14:30:27 GMT -5
Not quite. Brevoort says most of the information Tony gives Spider-Man in that issue is wrong so it is for all intents and purposes not rtrue and not in continuity. He did NOT say Iron Man was lying, and heavily implied it was retconned. It's in the CBR Q and A, don't ask me to root through all that for you! That's terrible. That's basically saying that you can't trust what's in the books, you have to go online and find a conversation with an editor to figure out what really happened. Not good writing. I tried to find the interview you discuss by searching for terms like "Spider-Man 535" and had no luck. I'm sorry, but if you want me to believe this conversation was retconned away, you are going to need to provide a least a link to the relevant page. Until then, as far as I'm concerned, what's in the book stands. I think Marvel believe fans are intelligent enough to work out for themselves that when it's clear some are getting trials, most get amnesty and NONE are going away for life, certainly not in that prison, then they may be able to work out something' s wrong with that convo Oh, I agree that the conversation doesn't reflect the situation *now*. But the question is, did it reflect the situation *then*. Remember (Frontline #11) that Tony's plan was to scare people into registering. Therefore, AT THAT TIME, he would have told Peter whatever advanced that agenda, ESPECIALLY if he fear Peter might be wavering in his support. Little difference here; if I slam you through a wall we're starting a fight. You're not super powered. Let's recap here: Spider-Man is bouncing down the corridor, looking VERY much like he's about to try to break out. Iron Man stops him by smashing him through a wall, most likely because he's flying along at top speed and picks hte fastest way- not hurting Peter at all even though he 100% DEFINITELY could have, even taken him down, had he so wished. He IMMEDIATELY raises his hands and says he just wants to talk sensibly. Right there, pretty HUGE indication that he was just trying to stop Peter and does not want a fight. They then continue to argue. Iron Man does not act agressively at all, they simply argue. Peter then, pretty much unprovoked (He reacts to a reasonable question as though it were a threat; can't blame him for being on edge but also can't blame Tony) puts Tony through a wall and starts attacking. I'd say it's pretty OBVIOUS Tony started the fight. You, apparantly, would disagree. No, I agree - Tony DID start the fight. Glad you've seen reason on this point! (Yes, I'm sure you meant Peter where you typed Tony.) Sorry, but if someone punches me in the face, then holds up their hands and wants to talk? They've still started a fight. It appears to be physiologically impossible for you to believe Tony ever does anything wrong. But, trust me, he started this fight. First punch, first ray attack, first kick, first whatever is always the person who starts the fight. If Tony wanted to stop Peter without starting a fight, he could have simply waited for him, hands held up in a "parley" gesture, and if Peter had knocked him through the wall, THEN Peter would have started the fight. But that's not what Tony did. The specifid mention as a presidential task force is deep in that stack of every CW book somewhere and I apologize if I won't go rooting through the stock for you. However, to argue that Iron Man's people weren't government enforcers is far, far beyond ridiculous. Not only did the president agree with him to bring Cap to ground, but he had POLICE help, SHIELD help, government help- Balok, we have had many legitimate arguments but trying to say Iron Man isn't a government enforcer is pathetic and desperate. Sometimes a question is simply a question. I'll take your word for it. Geez, relax a little, will ya? So when you say things which directly constitute a tie-in and you're not called out on it and it's established that this is the truth, that doesn't count as a retcon? Huh, dunno what you think should happen. Signed gift card? I haven't the slightest idea what this paragraph means. Sorry.
|
|
|
Post by The Night Phantom on Mar 17, 2007 16:43:04 GMT -5
Right now we just have one long Monty Python sketch (The one where the guy goes to buy an argument and it turns into "This is an argument," "No it's not," "Yes it is," "No it's not," "Yes it is.") I've lost interest. I think I'll bow out for a while, lurk around and wait for new debates to begin. This one has reached a stalemate. I think you're right. I can't convince Doc, and he can't convince me. Is that even a relevant point? Well, hold on while I bring in your opponent: Plus Night Phantom said AGES ago that I was mellowing out after I gave up some argument as a draw, this time I fight to the bitter end. You unleashed a monster, Phantom I am not the instigator of your, uh, crimes. The previous day, in that same thread, I’d said the following (the paraphrase in brackets has been made to replace a context-specific reference with something a little more general): Well then I guess this entire debate is fruitless. Why is that? If one’s view of this forum is that it is an arena where unwavering adherents to some belief must seek to figuratively beat adherents to some opposing belief into submission, then I suppose examination of a theory [proffered without intent to convince] might seem pointless. By contrast, I view this forum as a venue for an exchange of ideas. In my opinion, the present thread is being treated as an arena, not a forum. And I don’t see the point of the arena at all.
|
|
|
Post by Nutcase65 on Mar 17, 2007 18:45:02 GMT -5
see,.. when we start knocking people through walls it becomes an arena instead of a forrum
|
|