Governments already have that one its called the military, and yet they haven't declared themselves dictatorships.
What does that have to do with doing something to keep collateral damage under control? Because thats why they exist.
Spoilers Captain America: Civil War - Grading & Discussion
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
Governments already have that one its called the military, and yet they haven't declared themselves dictatorships.
What does that have to do with doing something to keep collateral damage under control? Because thats why they exist.
But, this brings us to the truck question. Why couldn't the truck move the hammer if mechanical objects need not be worthy? If the worthiness extends through any connecting objects to the person trying to do the moving, would this mean the elevator would operate unless there was an unworthy person inside the elevator with it?
Modern militaries have mind control, telekinesis and super-soldiers? I never saw any of that in the recruitment adverts!
No, it's just a pretext on which to push an overbearing agenda.
I can see Jessica having to register, given that she's never really hidden what she is and officially being on the books at HC&B. IIRC in the comics during CW, she skipped the country with her & Luke's kid while Luke stayed in NY and signed on with Cap's underground. Obviously they're not at that point yet in their story, so that's no very likely to happen.
Matt having to register would require someone deciding he's more than just a nutcase martial artist in a suit and then being able to tracking him down. Turns out he's probably not an easy man to sneak up on. They could probably get a DNA sample from the site of any one of his fights, but unless Matt Murdock is already in the system, that won't tell them anything much.
Luke is probably flying too low under the radar to be noticed at this point, though that may change if they go the "heroes for hire" route with him & Iron Fist.
Frank Castle probably doesn't even qualify as he's just considered a nutter with a thing for murdering criminals.
No a lot of them have access to nukes, drones, and bombing aircraft that can level buildings, Plus the U.S. Army probably could figure out how to make more super soldiers seeing as the made the original.
The agenda being not allowing the Avengers to do as they damned well please while answering to nobody, trample on sovereignty, ignore due process rights, and probably not bother to tell people of impending world ending events until they're happening.
You appear to have missed the point.
After repeated attempts over the last 70+ years, so far nobody besides Zola has even come close (with Bucky.) Red Skull, Hulk, Abomination, Deathlok: all failed attempts or dead ends. Turns out Erskine was a one of a kind.
It's implied that Howard Stark eventually pulled it off in '91, but it seems that Hydra wasn't able to reproduce his solution and were only able to create a handful of subjects who it seemed were mentally unstable. A recurring problem it seems based on this and Ross's attempts.
Like I said: pretext.
LOL! The MCU's weak governments (and their ineffectual military) probably wish they were at such a superior advantage.
Agreed.
Not exactly the brain trust, hence the reason it was always brilliant individuals (Erskine)--not the U.S. government that created the super soldier formula, while Hydra's scientists and Banner reached their own versions, but it was not the guns 'n' ammo government creating anything.
Sounds like many U.N. member nations, which are in no position to point fingers, considering the innumerable lives lost in the name of self-interest (or the spoon-fed "national security" line), disruption / occupation of other countries, and on and on. In the MCU, the Avengers are not doing that.
You mean the group responsible for saving people over and over again. Without the Avengers, all humanity would be under Loki's rule or dead--and they ask for nothing, do not invade nations, manipulate or divide countries like certain governments throughout the past 100+ years.
That word doesn't mean what you appear to think it means.
Sounds like a superhero to me, or did the Avengers have legal authority before the Accords?
The Avengers Initiative was sponsored by S.H.I.E.L.D..
S.H.I.E.L.D. "was" law enforcement.
S.H.I.E.L.D. "was" law enforcement.
Thinking further about what Odin's standards of worthiness might include, I had the purely hypothetical thought that one ingredient in the mix might be a certain degree of "cosmic awareness," if you will. Thor was rash and arrogant in his first film, but he knew his way around the Nine Realms. The Vision is part Infinity Gem, he has boatloads of cosmic awareness in him, whether or not he knows it. Whereas Cap, for all of his other virtues, has spent his life as a mudbound Earthling. Perhaps that could change in Infinity War (or whatever they're calling it now)....
emphasis on WAS. They really aren't anymore what with being defunct.
Actually, the dialogue in The Avengers implies that it, like TAHITI, were illegal operations carried out by Fury. The World Security Council definitely didn't sign off on it, and I don't think Pierce approved it.
Fury created a lot behind the backs of the Council and SHIELD, so the Avengers were never a sanctioned group.
Until the Battle of New York, S.H.I.E.L.D. was super secret and super shady, it and Fury were not answerable to the people of the world. When the press figured out that the World government had secretly been funnelling trillions into the creation and upkeep of a Hellicarrier fleet, heads should have rolled.
The Avengers were "created" as superheroes as S.H.I.E.L.D. was being legitimized on the world stage as necessary from that point forward, by saving the world.
The Avengers were "created" as superheroes as S.H.I.E.L.D. was being legitimized on the world stage as necessary from that point forward, by saving the world.
Governments already have the ability to flatten buildings at will. It's called having a military.
Nobody's saying that there should not be limits on the use of the Avengers' powers. In fact, putting them under United Nations authority instead of the authority of any one government is a good way to prevent their powers from being abused.
The Avengers, the Secret Warriors, Couslon!SHIELD, and the Defenders are all, themselves, rogue groups.
Secretary Ross made it very clear that none of the Avengers would be forced to serve if they didn't want to; they would be obliged to retire, and that is all.
I completely agree here.
Unfortunately, there's a bit of a contradiction between the Accords as depicted in Captain America: Civil War and the Accords as depicted in Agents of SHIELD. In CA:CW, the Accords are said to be specifically about putting the Avengers under multi-national authority, and it is established that any Avenger who does not wish to work for the U.N. may retire. Agents establishes, on the other hand, that the Accords require superpowered individuals to register with their national governments, which is obviously a violation of their civil rights.
I mean, I don't see how that's not already covered by existing international law. Like, if the Canadian government attempted to deploy Captain Canada within the sovereign borders of the Argentine Republic without the Argentine government's permission, that would be a clear violation of international law already -- legally no different than deploying the Canadian Forces within Argentina.
Meanwhile, putting the Avengers under U.N. control means there's a check on the temptation the Avengers themselves might have to intervene in international affairs. For instance, what if Steve and Tony had gotten it into their heads to deploy the Avengers to Ukraine on the side of the Ukrainian government after Russia annexed Crimea? Sure, they must have repelled Russian and Russian-backed forces -- but now they've gone and destabilized an already flammable situation. Putin might respond by, for instance, deciding to send the Russian Army into downtown Warsaw in retaliation. Private individuals making state-level interventions -- which is pretty much what the Avengers do -- are a serious threat to international order and to national sovereignty.
That would be an obvious violation of the sovereignty of the world's nations. Non-intervention in their domestic affairs is a cornerstone of the post-colonial era.
You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of the conception of national sovereignty.
To wit: Sovereign states do not answer to anybody. That's what makes them sovereign. It's why, for instance, the United States does not get to tell the people of Mexico who they may elect as president.
Yes, there are sovereign states that have trampled on other states' sovereignty, such as the United States when it invaded the Republic of Iraq in 2003. No one is saying that is acceptable.
But this does not mean that what amounts to a private militia should get away with it.
Tell me, how would you feel if it came out that Blackwater was violating the territorial integrity of sovereign nations, engaging in law enforcement activities that got innocent civilians killed without so much as a by-your-leave to national governments, and had even gotten an entire city destroyed when a weapon they created malfunctioned?
Every time the Avengers enter a country without obtaining permission from that country's government, they are invading that country. The Republic of Korea did not give them a law enforcement visa when they came to Seoul. The Republic of South Africa did not stamp their passports before the Hulk tore apart downtown Johannesburg.
No, they just build weapons that malfunction and destroy other nations' capital cities.
THIS.
Yep. Key word being "was." SHIELD had a right to engage in law enforcement activities because permission to exercise executive authority had been delegated to it by the democratically-elected governments that supported SHIELD and allowed it to operate within their borders.
Then SHIELD was legally dissolved, and therefore the Avengers lost their democratic mandate to exercise executive authority.
Though technically they both work of the US government now. Which is why I could see the Accords being used on them since I can see the UN oversight being to prevent any one nation from having their own army of superhumans, so i doubt the US having an under the table black ops superhuman group would go over well if they weren't up front with it.
Last edited:
No. President Ellis is choosing to have the ATCU unofficially take orders from Coulson, but this is a violation of the law. Legally, Coulson!SHIELD and the Secret Warriors are still vigilante groups.
Which he offered to drop in favor of officially bringing SHIELD back if Coulson went by the Accords.
Plus if they didn't have at lest some connection to the US government they wouldn't have had that problem with Russia.
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Poll
