Captain America Message Board >> View Thread

Author
The Nephilim


Location: Madripoor
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 3,948





"I am made of things your philosophy will never comprehend." -Loki
Posted with Apple iPad 603.3.8
Reverend Meteor


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 6,335




    Quote:
    It's quite an old story but I just happened to read it today and got curious. Was this Cap's true origin?..





No. You said Chuck Austen was involved.



Posted with Mozilla Firefox 55.0 on Windows 7
The Nephilim


Location: Madripoor
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 3,948


Guess you're right. Although "revealing" the government was responsible for freezing Cap during WW2 to prevent him from interfering with the coming atrocities was interesting nonetheless.




"I am made of things your philosophy will never comprehend." -Loki
Posted with Apple iPad 603.3.8
Comicguy1


Member Since: Tue Apr 04, 2017
Posts: 544


I think that it was under the Marvel Knights banner, and I think that was somewhat questionable in terms of continuity. Which is kind of a shame, because it was pretty good stuff.


Posted with Google Chrome 48.0.2564.116 on Windows 10
D. Strange


Member Since: Tue Sep 19, 2017
Posts: 17


Well, whether or not Hiroshima and Nagasaki were atrocities are up for debate. I fervently disagree with it... But that probably isn't a road to go down.

I will say that the Japanese, Italian, German, and Japanese (not twice on accident) would be a much better choice. Of course it was mentioned in INVADERS, but not delved into as much as it may have been if written now.

What I have to say that relates to this comic is that back in Captain America HEROES REBORN, that was the exact reason he was put out of commission.

I wonder if that is where Austen got the idea.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 52.0 on Windows Vista
Reverend Meteor


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 6,335




    Quote:
    Guess you're right. Although "revealing" the government was responsible for freezing Cap during WW2 to prevent him from interfering with the coming atrocities was interesting nonetheless.


I think Captain America couldn't work as a character if he had been put in the situation of learning about the bombings before they happened.

Either he would leave hundreds of thousands of the enemy to a fiery death and live with that or he would act on his conscience and sabotage or reveal the government's plan thus more or less becoming a traitor.

Captain America works as a character because he never had to make that hard choice. Jumping ahead to the 60's he can pretend (and that's what it is) to be this representation of American values. I don't think he would have been ok with the rationale that the bombs saved more lives than a ground war in Japan.



Posted with Mozilla Firefox 55.0 on Windows 7
The Nephilim


Location: Madripoor
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 3,948


Yes it was under MK. And I did like the story, particularly how the revelation was introduced in a vision quest. And then there was Thor vs the Native American thunder god bts but pretty cool nonetheless.




"I am made of things your philosophy will never comprehend." -Loki
Posted with Apple iPad 603.3.8
D. Strange


Member Since: Tue Sep 19, 2017
Posts: 17


The real reason why it should be avoided is because it is an incredibly complex part of American history, and it isn't an easy thing to compress into such formats, without seeming neglectful or at least begging for a debate.

For instance, I don't agree with you that Cap would have had a problem with the A-bomb drops. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but I will give my reasoning, then you can explain to me why I'm wrong (please be specific) then hopefully my point will be made as to how difficult it is.

To start off, Captain America is the most moral character in all of comics, so I have to prove that it is the most moral choice possible.

Second, I will subtract elements we learned later, such as the planned dropping of Bubonic plague on the West Coast (completely collected, more than needed) and the plane started by Germany, they finished, that was about to go into production, that could have sunk destroyers killing essential cities.

I'll start with the element you mentioned, people caught in a fiery death.

That's most bombing campaigns in general, and in specific, the Dresden Fire bombings, which were in Feb. 1945, presumably before he was frozen.

It was the same basic concept as Hiroshima and Nagasaki, to inflict so much damage they would surrender to save more potential lives, to much less effect. It was also designed to create spreading fires.

Even that was just a 20th century version of the Union's "Total War" also known as Sherman's March to the Sea. Where Confederate property was burned and destroyed to quicken the war's end.

The real point is, would Cap have had a problem if it was dropped on Nazi Germany, since that was the original plan, many people who appose would say no, it would be different.

You see, it wasn't really about a land war, it was about ending THE war.

Japan had been committing atrocities since the mid-30s that needed to be ended. Most famous was Nan-King (which had actions so disturbing I don't even want to type them). And unlike the Nazis, they didn't hide what they were doing,the West saw it, read about, and Japanese civilians cheered.

Ending the War quickly would also free the abducted Korean Comfort Women (some as young as 14) from their sexual slavery.

The entire populace of Japan was being mobilized into militias (admittedly only for when the Americans came ashore), this included lining up kids (aged 11-14) in the beach head to hold off the American forces, with sticks and broken guns for a chance to wear them out and play on guilt.

Once you DO invade a country, it is no longer military cost, civilian casualties rise astronomically, and would do so even more since the notion of what a civilian was, was about to change between the two countries.

And as for the actual soldiers, the MOST conservative estimates were about a quarter of a million (some say 50 thousand) on each side . EACH side, and most CONSERVATIVE estimates.

That isn't including people getting maimed and disfigured, or the mental toll that comes along with war.

Don't forget the freeing of Japanese, German, Italian, and again Japanese, American citizens from internment camps. Which brings up the fat that POWS would be freed sooner.

Then their is the post was aspects of written a constitution for Japan that was more equitable for the oppressed ethnic and religious minorities, and more fair for women, all of who had a much better deal under the new laws...even if it is still problematic to this day for them in the society at large.

Then there was the fact that Hiroshima was used to threaten Stalin out of his planned invasion of Western Europe (a third World War we probably would have used) and freed up money for the Marshall plan that kept the commies form subversively taking over western Europe (shocking how close France and Italy were). Those two, admittedly stretch whether Steve could have known that.

It was all for the much greater good. YEs, it was horrifying, and terrible, but it was also the end of the most brutal war of the 20th century. And OI believe there is no greater moral stance that doing what is best for the most people in the hardest of times. So Marvel's most Moral man would make the most moral choice..

so there is my argument. I look forward to hearing yours, again, to show how complex it all is.

Hope I wasn't TOO much of a jackass.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 52.0 on Windows Vista
Reverend Meteor


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 6,335





First let draw the distinction in what I feel and what I think Cap feels. I personally don't have a major problem with us dropping the bombs. But I'm an amoral jerk and I would have wanted payback for Pearl Harbor. But Cap isn't me. He has morals and values and ethics and a bunch of similar words that don't apply to me either.

While Cap certainly believes "war is hell" I do think he would have had a problem with his superiors ordering the destruction of Hiroshima (and THEN Nakasaki). As a modern comic reader I don't think modern Cap is the ends justify the means type character. But I grant it's war time and a different era where dissent is frowned upon so maybe he wouldn't actively oppose the bombings or snitch and tell the world about the government's plan...but I don't think he could stay Captain America after the bombings if he hadn't been frozen. I don't think he could live with it. He would feel there was probably another way (logical or not) and I think it would eat at him. I don't think he could still traipse around in a colorful costume espousing how great America was after we nuked hundreds of thousands.

Could the government have found another way like showing a demonstration of one of the bombs on an island for the Japanese leaders? Did Nagasaki have to be destroyed...if we gave the Japanese a week after Hiroshima would they have surrendered by then? Were the Japanese already considering surrender? Would Tokyo have been a better military target than say Nagasaki which I think was a fishing village? I think the what ifs would eat Steve alive and he would question his own patriotism.

And this is probably a very wide tangent to go off on because Cap would probably have no knowledge of it...but like I said in another thread the uranium used in the Manhattan Project was extracted from the Shinkolobwe mine in the Belgian Congo...it wasn't the Americans or Beglians workers who were used to extract that radioactive ore...it was the Congolese. This was already a bloody business before the Uranium was refined much less the bomb dropped. But like I said Cap probably couldn't have known about it so forget I mentioned it.

Maybe the Cap as written in the golden age could have supported the decision to nuke. He wasn't the version we have today who is a cliche that is for everybody. The modern version doesn't have that American exceptionalism thing going on and would never be racist towards the Japanese. Maybe Golden Age Cap would have been the ends justify the means type guy. I just can't see the modern Cap ever agreeing with the decision or taking pride in the cost of ending the war meant sacrificing that many lives. Ever since I've been reading him Cap isn't about moral relativism. Saving the most lives doesn't justify an atrocity that still kills numerous lives (this is where we differ...I very much do).

You have a better argument than I do. But from what we've seen of Steve in modern times I don't think he would be at peace with the decision to nuke Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And if he learned about the decision prior to the bombings I don't think he would have been able to handle it. As a soldier I don't think he had any conception of just how destructive a nuclear weapon could be and I think he would be horrified at what this new weapon could do in either Americans hands or one of our enemies (or even our allies). In my head if Steve had been around to hear about the bombings he would be a very depressed individual knowing his country had the potential to level cities with a bomb and that someone else was eventually going to get their hands on one. I don't think Steve would approve of nuclear weapons in general much less the way we used them. But that might be me misunderstanding the character.



Posted with Mozilla Firefox 55.0 on Windows 7
The Nephilim


Location: Madripoor
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 3,948


I wouldn’t be surprised. But I did appreciate Austen’s interpretation a lot more.




"I am made of things your philosophy will never comprehend." -Loki
Posted with Apple iPad 604.1.38
The Nephilim


Location: Madripoor
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 3,948



    Quote:


      Quote:
      Guess you're right. Although "revealing" the government was responsible for freezing Cap during WW2 to prevent him from interfering with the coming atrocities was interesting nonetheless.



    Quote:
    I think Captain America couldn't work as a character if he had been put in the situation of learning about the bombings before they happened.



    Quote:
    Either he would leave hundreds of thousands of the enemy to a fiery death and live with that or he would act on his conscience and sabotage or reveal the government's plan thus more or less becoming a traitor.



    Quote:
    Captain America works as a character because he never had to make that hard choice. Jumping ahead to the 60's he can pretend (and that's what it is) to be this representation of American values. I don't think he would have been ok with the rationale that the bombs saved more lives than a ground war in Japan.


He wouldn’t be Captain America if he did.

I believe a story can be written without much controversy. I could see a story where Cap is sent away on some bogus mission/operation to prevent him from interfering. By the time he finds out it's too late. Cap then goes under the radar and "gives up the shield" for awhile before he realizes he could stand for America's ideals without indubitably supporting its government. His Nomad persona might’ve been better suited here.

Or perhaps during the Original Sin event, Cap’s overwhelming guilt from not being able to stop the bombing comes back. A false guilt he somehow previously “paid” to keep buried within.. but now has to face it all over again?

https://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/10/104431/4093728-original+sin+003-013.jpg


Just a thought.





"I am made of things your philosophy will never comprehend." -Loki
Posted with Apple iPad 604.1.38
The Nephilim


Location: Madripoor
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 3,948


I don’t think a nuclear bomb will ever be a lesser of two evils.

But that’s just me.




"I am made of things your philosophy will never comprehend." -Loki
Posted with Apple iPad 604.1.38
D. Strange


Member Since: Tue Sep 19, 2017
Posts: 17


I actually agree, that cap would not have stayed Cap if he had not been frozen, and I would like to expand on that, but first I would like to address some other things, including how frozen Cap could be okay with it.

I also think that there is precedent in comics to back me. And there are a few other things I would like to address, but first the precedents.

-In INVADERS NOW! it is revealed that the Invaders killed a whole town (murdered as Cap put it). He showed deep regret, even willing to sacrifice his life to bring them back, but acknowledged the the necessity of the time.

-IN ALL-WINNERS SQUAD: BAND OF HEROES (an incredibly underrated mini-series that didn't even get an end due to economic issues), there is a mystery of what happened to a hero, while it is never revealed, it is clear it was nothing good. It is also made known, Cap was at the least aware of it.

- This may seem cheap, but in Gruenwald's run, he did kill a man to sve a life, and this is just a larger example of that.

For the other things to clear up...

Yes, the bombing of Nagasaki was necessary. It is a misconception that a single blast, or even two ended the war. In actuality it was the threat of a third dropped on Tokyo (which we actually didn't have) that sealed the deal. That was because that is where the government was. They really didn't care about their people.

I also strongly reject the idea it was dropped out of racism. Partially because the original paln was to drop it on Berlin if need be, partially because it is wrong.

But if you want some coaxing, before each drop, the US warned the Japanese government (who did nothing to evacuate) and dropped flyers telling civilians to leave the day before. Those attempts to save lives are not usually done when you view a group as sub-worthy of life or deserving of something.

Also you mentioned the Congolese, who very likely were also providing uranium for the A-bomb Japan was working on (I would have to double check, but I believe they were at least somewhat close).

But as you said it was already a business. And by bringing up innocent people as you did, a very valid point, however that returns one of my points.

What of the people in internment camps? What of the people in occupied areas and their horrors? What of the comfort women? They were sex slaves, that would not be freed until the war ended.

If there is one thing Cap's morals dictate it the value of innocent life. And THEIR right to freedom. THEIR right to peace. Even if the price is disturbingly high. Admittedly, whether the price is fair is a matter of

And you are right he wouldn't know. He very likely would have known about Dresden, which was the same idea, just with lower murder-tech.

Honestly, I think the idea that he would sacrifice so much, just to hold onto his world view is selfish.

Now onto my points about Cap.

1. I think that Cap can justify it unfrozen, because he knows the horror it ended and understands it, but would also think if he had been unfrozen he could have found another way. But he wouldn't have, so...

2. If not frozen, and he DID find out about it, he would have accepted the necessity of it. I also believe he would not stay as Captain America.

After WWII the US began using its foreign policy to change society away from a third World War. Much of this was providing foreign aid to other countries (that is why it is currently part of our defense budget), the best examples being The Marshall Plan, dropping supplies to East Berlin as the Soviets tries to starve them in 47, and The Peace Corps.

Ironically, even Korea and Vietnam acted as ways to challenge a larger conflict.

Truman was one of the major proponents of this, having had dealing with Stalin and dropping the bombs as two of his first major choices as president. (He also tried to push civil rights harder, but most of it got stonewalled by Congress, just an interesting fact).

I think this is the route Steve would have chosen. An acceptance of what happened, but having been so shook, he chose more subtle ways to save the world, to PREVENT the next big war.

I know that it has become common place to cast Steve as a Soldier above all else, but I don't see him as such. I see him as most of what that generation's soldiers were, a man who did what he ha d to do, and will keep doing it as long as he has the responsibility, but more over someone who wants an end to the fighting and a nice quite life.

So, thoughts? opinions? Did I prove my larger point that this is a far more complex and twisty idea that those who tried to tackle it in comics gave it credit for? That if tou are going to do it, you REALLY need to let it breathe?

This has been an interesting back and forth. Can I at least get that?


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 52.0 on Windows Vista
D. Strange


Member Since: Tue Sep 19, 2017
Posts: 17


That's fine. It is certainly your right. While I don't agree with that belief, I do certainly understand the idea and logic behind it.

If it makes you feel any better, the US tried to limit the deaths greatly, by warning the Japanese government, and dropped fliers warning people about what was coming.

Also, Japan was working on an atomic bomb as well, and if they had finished it before the bombs dropped, they probably would have hit a more populace area out of desperation.

Also, the existence and use of atomic bombs, causing a lingering shadow, probably prevented WWIII from happening.

But like I said, I do understand and respect the ideas behind your view.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 52.0 on Windows Vista
D. Strange


Member Since: Tue Sep 19, 2017
Posts: 17


I actually think that the A-Bombs could be used as a good basis for Cap's (more or less) no kill policy.

Having it raise the stakes in just what does justify killing. Forcing him to look harder at a situation to avoid dark necessities from ever popping up in the first place. I guess that means it could also be a good push to describe his determination.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 52.0 on Windows Vista
Reverend Meteor


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 6,335




    Quote:
    I actually agree, that cap would not have stayed Cap if he had not been frozen, and I would like to expand on that, but first I would like to address some other things, including how frozen Cap could be okay with it.



    Quote:
    I also think that there is precedent in comics to back me. And there are a few other things I would like to address, but first the precedents.



    Quote:
    -In INVADERS NOW! it is revealed that the Invaders killed a whole town (murdered as Cap put it). He showed deep regret, even willing to sacrifice his life to bring them back, but acknowledged the the necessity of the time.



    Quote:
    -IN ALL-WINNERS SQUAD: BAND OF HEROES (an incredibly underrated mini-series that didn't even get an end due to economic issues), there is a mystery of what happened to a hero, while it is never revealed, it is clear it was nothing good. It is also made known, Cap was at the least aware of it.



    Quote:
    - This may seem cheap, but in Gruenwald's run, he did kill a man to sve a life, and this is just a larger example of that.



    Quote:
    For the other things to clear up...



    Quote:
    Yes, the bombing of Nagasaki was necessary. It is a misconception that a single blast, or even two ended the war. In actuality it was the threat of a third dropped on Tokyo (which we actually didn't have) that sealed the deal. That was because that is where the government was. They really didn't care about their people.



    Quote:
    I also strongly reject the idea it was dropped out of racism. Partially because the original paln was to drop it on Berlin if need be, partially because it is wrong.


I agree. Maybe it's (what's the annoying phrase they use today) the optics of it.

It wasn't racist. It just SEEMED racist. We dropped it on Japan not Germany. But I know I know the bombs weren't completed before Germany surrendered while Japan had yet to do so.


    Quote:
    But if you want some coaxing, before each drop, the US warned the Japanese government (who did nothing to evacuate) and dropped flyers telling civilians to leave the day before. Those attempts to save lives are not usually done when you view a group as sub-worthy of life or deserving of something.


I didn't know that detail. So good job.


    Quote:
    Also you mentioned the Congolese, who very likely were also providing uranium for the A-bomb Japan was working on (I would have to double check, but I believe they were at least somewhat close).


I don't think the Japanese (or the Germans) were close to building the nuclear bomb. I think after the bomb was dropped there is a report that Heisenberg while imprisoned in the UK let it slip after Hiroshima that he didn't think Germany had enough nuclear fissile material to make it happen.

Of course if the Germans or Japanese were close to a nuclear bomb I doubt they would let the other know.


    Quote:
    But as you said it was already a business. And by bringing up innocent people as you did, a very valid point, however that returns one of my points.



    Quote:
    What of the people in internment camps? What of the people in occupied areas and their horrors? What of the comfort women? They were sex slaves, that would not be freed until the war ended.


Great points. The Japanese were committing atrocities.


    Quote:
    If there is one thing Cap's morals dictate it the value of innocent life. And THEIR right to freedom. THEIR right to peace. Even if the price is disturbingly high. Admittedly, whether the price is fair is a matter of



    Quote:
    And you are right he wouldn't know. He very likely would have known about Dresden, which was the same idea, just with lower murder-tech.



    Quote:
    Honestly, I think the idea that he would sacrifice so much, just to hold onto his world view is selfish.



    Quote:
    Now onto my points about Cap.



    Quote:
    1. I think that Cap can justify it unfrozen, because he knows the horror it ended and understands it, but would also think if he had been unfrozen he could have found another way. But he wouldn't have, so...



    Quote:
    2. If not frozen, and he DID find out about it, he would have accepted the necessity of it. I also believe he would not stay as Captain America.



    Quote:
    After WWII the US began using its foreign policy to change society away from a third World War. Much of this was providing foreign aid to other countries (that is why it is currently part of our defense budget), the best examples being The Marshall Plan, dropping supplies to East Berlin as the Soviets tries to starve them in 47, and The Peace Corps.



    Quote:
    Ironically, even Korea and Vietnam acted as ways to challenge a larger conflict.



    Quote:
    Truman was one of the major proponents of this, having had dealing with Stalin and dropping the bombs as two of his first major choices as president. (He also tried to push civil rights harder, but most of it got stonewalled by Congress, just an interesting fact).



    Quote:
    I think this is the route Steve would have chosen. An acceptance of what happened, but having been so shook, he chose more subtle ways to save the world, to PREVENT the next big war.



    Quote:
    I know that it has become common place to cast Steve as a Soldier above all else, but I don't see him as such. I see him as most of what that generation's soldiers were, a man who did what he ha d to do, and will keep doing it as long as he has the responsibility, but more over someone who wants an end to the fighting and a nice quite life.



    Quote:
    So, thoughts? opinions? Did I prove my larger point that this is a far more complex and twisty idea that those who tried to tackle it in comics gave it credit for? That if tou are going to do it, you REALLY need to let it breathe?


Yeah it's a complex issue.


    Quote:
    This has been an interesting back and forth. Can I at least get that?


um...sure. I have taken no offense.



Posted with Mozilla Firefox 55.0 on Windows 7
The Nephilim


Location: Madripoor
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 3,948



    Quote:
    That's fine. It is certainly your right. While I don't agree with that belief, I do certainly understand the idea and logic behind it.



    Quote:
    If it makes you feel any better, the US tried to limit the deaths greatly, by warning the Japanese government, and dropped fliers warning people about what was coming.


Interesting. I was curious enough to look this up and this is what I came across for whatever it’s worth:

“The LeMay leaflets were dropped on various cities saying that some cities would be bombed (i.e., firebombed), but they did not reference the atomic bomb. These flyers don’t really count because they do not list Hiroshima and Nagasaki, nor do they mention atomic bombs.
Hiroshima was not leafleted before the bombing.
Nagasaki was leafleted after the bombing.
In any case, the purpose of the leaflets was not to avoid loss of civilian life. It was psychological warfare, aimed at convincing the Japanese that continuing was hopeless and they should surrender.”

https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-the-US-dropped-flyers-as-a-warning-before-bombing-Hiroshima-and-Nagasaki



    Quote:
    Also, Japan was working on an atomic bomb as well, and if they had finished it before the bombs dropped, they probably would have hit a more populace area out of desperation.



    Quote:
    Also, the existence and use of atomic bombs, causing a lingering shadow, probably prevented WWIII from happening.



    Quote:
    But like I said, I do understand and respect the ideas behind your view.


I as well.





"I am made of things your philosophy will never comprehend." -Loki
Posted with Apple iPad 604.1.38
D. Strange


Member Since: Tue Sep 19, 2017
Posts: 17


Well, unfortunately this is the internet so someone has to take offense. Therefore, I will be offended by my remarks. Where do I get off.

It was admittedly a long time ago I read about Japan's atomic bomb project, so I won't swear to anything involving it except that it existed.

This was a fun chat.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 52.0 on Windows Vista
D. Strange


Member Since: Tue Sep 19, 2017
Posts: 17


Well, yes it was psychological warfare... to save lives. The idea was to scare them so much (Dresden being the obvious example they hoped would spring to mind) they would surrender. Especially given that Japanese architecture was practically designed to burn.

It obviously didn't work.

As for the leaflets... I don't know what to tell you. I once saw an interview with a survivor that mentioned getting one. Now This was a fairly average looking survivor talking about a major historical event. That can bring people out of the wood work who aren't exactly truthful about there location.

However, the Japanese have lied and denied so much about what they did in WWII, to the point they don't even (nor have they ever) teach it in their schools.

They are the kings of revisionist history to hide their truly disturbing atrocities (I would recommend 'The Rape of Nan King' if you are curious, and the name doesn't even scratch the surface of that one in a long list). As such, I'm usually suspicious about such claims that may shift guilt.

But they did send specific warnings to the government (yes not mentioning the atomic bomb the first time) to try and coax a surrender. In fact it was actually the third such call about a non-existent bomb falling on Tokyo, that really caused a surrender.

One rumor I always wondered if it were true or not, is that Truman asked to see photos of what Hiroshima looked like (including the people) before Nagasaki, so he would be able to know exactly what he did and if he would do it again. This maybe true statesmen supposedly inspired Ozymandias in Watchmen wanting to view what he did to New York and "experience every death."

Like I said though, the action, and the release of the nuclear genie is certainly not to be taken lightly, and I can certainly see both as reasons that one could see the cost not being worth the benefit. Even if I don't agree.

I would only ever condemn a shallow level of thought either way, which you I sense do not have.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 52.0 on Windows Vista
Mikel Midnight


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 1,318



    Quote:
    Maybe the Cap as written in the golden age could have supported the decision to nuke.


There was a story written about Cap in the 40s at the end of which, about a million Japanese soldiers committed suicide as a result of his actions, and he never seemed anything but satisfied with that result.



Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 7
Reverend Meteor


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 6,335



Posted with Mozilla Firefox 55.0 on Windows 7
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 620


If Cap WOULD have quit...then he is a hypocrite for not quitting soon after her unfroze.

If he would have felt so strongly as to quit or try and stop the bombings he should never have continued after he found out.

I think he would have hated its being used but also accepted its use. Moral or not he was a man of his time...today he might oppose such a thing directly...but not then. He might come to think we have to find a better way (and we do), but I can see him accepting its use.


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
Reverend Meteor


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 6,335




    Quote:
    If Cap WOULD have quit...then he is a hypocrite for not quitting soon after her unfroze.


To me he probably should have not resumed being Captain America after learning about the bombings after the defrost.



    Quote:
    If he would have felt so strongly as to quit or try and stop the bombings he should never have continued after he found out.



    Quote:
    I think he would have hated its being used but also accepted its use. Moral or not he was a man of his time...today he might oppose such a thing directly...but not then. He might come to think we have to find a better way (and we do), but I can see him accepting its use.






Posted with Mozilla Firefox 55.0 on Windows 7
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 620



    Quote:


      Quote:
      If Cap WOULD have quit...then he is a hypocrite for not quitting soon after her unfroze.



    Quote:
    To me he probably should have not resumed being Captain America after learning about the bombings after the defrost.


Fair enough...or at least directly working through the government. He could say he is trying to represent the ideals and the best of the country...not any particular administration, and not being close to any president etc...


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10

Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2017 Powermad Software