Storm - You Are Being A Hypocrite (with all due respect)

Do I even have to say it? Regenesis JUST came out folks... What do you think Storm is saying here?

Xavier didn't believe in keeping his students alive?

Now, this is her talking about Logan and the rest of X-Force killing the purifiers who killed a busload of Xavier's students after torturing and killing Jay Guthrie. They also killed Sophie with a bullet to the head. They also attacked the mansion and hurt and killed other students. In response, Cyclops formed X-force and ordered them to kill the enemy...

X-Force did as ordered...

After Second Coming, Storm found out, and we all know how she judged Wolverine. The following scan comes from Second Coming #2, the event in which Cable died...

you killed people who tortured, shot, and missiled students. HOW DARE YOU!?

Now, according to Hope that event happened about TWO MONTHS AGO. Note, that's two months in Marvel Time... For us in the real world, that happened almost exactly ONE YEAR ago...

So, here it is two months later and Storm is basically saying the same thing...

Let's be clear.

  1. Storm does not take killing lightly.
  2. Storm does not enjoy killing.
  3. But Storm DOES KILL WHEN NECESSARY. (please note that I said WHEN NECESSARY)

So, the woman who is calling X-Force an abomination for avenging the death of a busload of children and protecting the rest of the students, is responsible for a large number of deaths herself... As far as I know, Storm has always been justified in the times that she has killed... But she HAS killed WHEN NECESSARY, just as X-Force did...

Here, we see her giving the ORDER to kill and killing.

Here is one of the first times we saw Storm deliberately killing. This is not an alternate universe Storm... This is Storm of earth 616.

.

During the Skrull invasion Storm and T'Challa had a plan and it worked very well. They killed EVERY SINGLE SKRULL that attacked Wakanda. (I think they did the right thing.) Note, that T'Challa and Storm also too part in the actual fighting; they did kill. Not only did they kill, they put the HEADS OF THE DEAD SKRULLS ON PIKES!

It's only been a matter of months since Storm put a number poor souls out of their misery, during that rather stupid vampire story arc...

My point?

1: Storm DOES KILL WHEN NECESSARY. She kills often.

2: Storm judges Wolverine and X-Force for doing exactly what she does. She is saying, for THEM, it is wrong...

Hypocrite:

(1) A person who engages in the same behaviors he condemns others for.

(2) A person who professes certain ideals, but fails to live up to them.

(3) A person who holds other people to higher standards than he holds himself.

Does Storm not fit the very definition of a hypocrite?

Start the Conversation
85 Comments
  • 85 results
  • 1
  • 2
Posted by Amegashita

I say she fits, but dependent upon who you ask, they would beg to disagree.

Edited by BlackArmor

Storm is up way two high on that high horse "I'm a godess bow before my awesomeness" thing she does. storm's a great charecter but her ego makes her impossible to stomach very often
Posted by JediXMan

I just want to say:
 
X-Force was a step in the right direction. The worst move Scott made was disbanding them.

Moderator
Posted by SC

"2: Storm judges Wolverine and X-Force for doing exactly what she does. She is saying, for THEM, it is wrong..." 
 
 
Well here is one point of contention. When you say exactly, do you mean same place, time, intent, action, plus like a billion other exact things? I mean... well unlikely. Things are always a little bit different. Remember Storm kills when she thinks, is necessary. Who really knows whether it actually is or not. Her judgement might be more fallible in this sense than her being a hypocrite. Similarly applied to Wolverine and Cyclops and hypocrisy. 

Moderator
Posted by Avenging-X-Bolt

i think it's different. Storm was in immediate danger therefore was forced to kill. What X-Force did was retaliation if i'm not mistaken.

Posted by TenguMan8

A major part of me does agree that it's hypocritical...
 
However another small part of me can see her point when it came to x-force. She did tell Logan that, that may be the last drink they ever share together, but she didn't stop associating with him or any other member of X-force(she was even about to leave with Logan and go to Westchester). IMO I think her(beast, nightcrawler ,ect.) were more upset about X-force's main goal being taking out threats, by any means necessary. To me Storm, Beast, and Nightcrawler would aim for incapacitation before falling back on killing. I don't think they'd be as against the killing, if it was a last resort or in self-defense. As the people who (arguably) believe most strongly, in Xavier's dream, they'd probably want to avoid killing as best as they can, and the X-men having a team that is more or less aiming for a kill would probably have them somewhat ticked off.
 
X-Force is necessary though, because with such a small portion of the mutant race still alive the mutants need some one to take out these threats, that could end their race. To me the killing X-force does could be called self-defense, because it's in defense of the entire race so I can see what Storm's saying as being hypocritical, but i still see where she's coming from with it. 

Posted by Timandm

@JediXMan said:

I just want to say: X-Force was a step in the right direction. The worst move Scott made was disbanding them.

I thought I was the only one that felt that way...

@SC: So... You're saying, perhaps she feels that the times that SHE killed, it was justifiable and necessary, but she does not feel it was justifiable and necessary when X-Force killed, yes?

But, is that not typical hypocritical thinking? (notice the internal rhyme there...)

"When '' I " lie it is always for a good reason, but when OTHERS lie they're just being dishonorable asshats"

"When " I " cheat on my husband, it's because I'm an unappreciated unloved wife, but when " HE " cheats on me it's because he's a cheating bastard."

Think about this... How many students were killed, not just wounded, killed before Scott formed X-Factor? 44... The number is probably higher, I'd have to go back and read. But 42 students were killed on a bus, Sophie was shot in the head by a sniper, and Jay Guthrie was tortured and finally shot to death...

FORTY FOUR STUDENTS MURDERED. The police hadn't done a thing. The government hadn't done a thing. The AVENGERS had done nothing... I know YOU'RE aware of this, but I'm pointing this out because STORM was aware of all of this as well.... Storm knew at least 44 students of Xavier's school were murdered... And she doesn't think that deserves retribution or justice?

So, let's compare that, to the times SHE killed... In the latest adjectiveless X-Men, she ordered the X-Men to kill the brood. They had not yet killed a single X-Man... Even if they had, there would only have been four deaths... How can she think the value of the lives of 44 students are so much less than the lives of 4 X-Men.

Or, we could think about the fact that Storm killed Marrow, who hadn't killed ANY of the students or ANY of the X-Men... None whatsoever... Marrow HAD killed normal humans, and could have been arrested and tried... It was completely within Storm's capabilities to take Marrow into custody... But instead, she made a judgement call, and ripped Marrow's heart out... (Retconned later such that Marrow had two hearts and accelerated healing...) How can Storm say it's okay for her to kill Marrow for murdering people, but not okay for X-Force to kill extremists who not only had killed 44 students, but were well armed and already planning to kill more.?

How could her judgement of their different situations be THAT different? Marrow, was one person with a low level power that could easily have been captured, jailed and tried who had killed NO students or X-Men... The purifiers was a large organization of well armed trained terrorists who had murdered 44 students and intended to murder more....

It's just too far beyond reason or logic... No?

Posted by Gambit1024

Everything about this thread is beautiful.

Edited by Timandm

@Avenging-X-Bolt said:

i think it's different. Storm was in immediate danger therefore was forced to kill. What X-Force did was retaliation if i'm not mistaken.

But Storm wasn't in immediate danger when she killed Marrow... If you read the scan, she was well in control and intended to kill her. She could easily have shocked her unconscious, but she deliberately ripped Marrow's heart out...

Also, in that scan where she is ordering the X-Men to kill the Brood (which was actually from Astonishing X-Men 42 not adjectiveless X-Men like I said earlier) she wasn't in immediate danger. The thing that makes Storm decide to kill the brood was that they disconnected the 'little brood guy' from the hive mind... The X-Men were containing the Brood and intended to capture them and keep them alive... So, Storm's decision wasn't based on the safety of the X-Men...

With X-Force, it is fair to say it was retaliation, but it's not accurate to say it was ONLY retaliation. Scott had the purifiers investigated. Rictor, from X-Factor, discovered that they were well armed and planned on more attacks and murders. It was also a pre-emptive strike. A preventative measure. it's true, that the X-Men want to avoid killing whenever possible, even when they are being attacked by people who want to kill them... But how many of your own do you actually let die before you start killing the enemy? In Storms case, she didn't let ANY of the X-Men die before she decided to kill... Don't get me wrong, I think she made the right decision... I just think she needs to be more realistic or fair when judging X-Force.

@TenguMan8: A major part of me does agree that it's hypocritical... However another small part of me can see her point when it came to x-force.

Oh, let's just ignore that part of you... LOL! (Just playing)

She did tell Logan that, that may be the last drink they ever share together, but she didn't stop associating with him or any other member of X-force(she was even about to leave with Logan and go to Westchester).

True... Which she SOOOO should have done...

IMO I think her(beast, nightcrawler ,ect.) were more upset about X-force's main goal being taking out threats, by any means necessary. To me Storm, Beast, and Nightcrawler would aim for incapacitation before falling back on killing. I don't think they'd be as against the killing, if it was a last resort or in self-defense. As the people who (arguably) believe most strongly, in Xavier's dream, they'd probably want to avoid killing as best as they can, and the X-men having a team that is more or less aiming for a kill would probably have them somewhat ticked off.

I can easily accept that for Beast and Night Crawler. That makes perfect sense. They might have killed but I can't remember when. But with Storm it's different since she HAS killed at times when it wasn't in self-defense. The Brood (from a long time ago), the Skrulls (they did not HAVE to kill every single Skrull), Marrow, the humans being used by the vampires...

X-Force is necessary though, because with such a small portion of the mutant race still alive the mutants need some one to take out these threats, that could end their race. To me the killing X-force does could be called self-defense, because it's in defense of the entire race so I can see what Storm's saying as being hypocritical, but i still see where she's coming from with it.

YES... Absolutely...

Posted by SC
@Timandm said:

@SC: So... You're saying, perhaps she feels that the times that SHE killed, it was justifiable and necessary, but she does not feel it was justifiable and necessary when X-Force killed, yes?

  
No, as in that she alone has the power of knowing when its right or necessary, but she might have this thing called discretion. So it applies to all. Sort of like she might see that X-Forces actions aren't the same as Magnetos, but by some they could oversimplify both groups actions and call X-Force and Cyclops hypocrites. Are they? Or...  
 
@Timandm said:

But, is that not typical hypocritical thinking? (notice the internal rhyme there...)

 
No. Not unless you've assumed she maintains some exclusive power to always be right. 
 
@Timandm said:

"When '' I " lie it is always for a good reason, but when OTHERS lie they're just being dishonorable asshats"

"When " I " cheat on my husband, it's because I'm an unappreciated unloved wife, but when " HE " cheats on me it's because he's a cheating bastard."


 More like, when some lie for a good reason, its a good reason, when others lie for dishonorable reasons, they are being dishonorable.  
 
When some cheat its because they cheat, when others cheat, its because they cheat??  
 
@Timandm said:

Think about this... How many students were killed, not just wounded, killed before Scott formed X-Factor? 44... The number is probably higher, I'd have to go back and read. But 42 students were killed on a bus, Sophie was shot in the head by a sniper, and Jay Guthrie was tortured and finally shot to death...

FORTY FOUR STUDENTS MURDERED. The police hadn't done a thing. The government hadn't done a thing. The AVENGERS had done nothing... I know YOU'RE aware of this, but I'm pointing this out because STORM was aware of all of this as well.... Storm knew at least 44 students of Xavier's school were murdered... And she doesn't think that deserves retribution or justice?

So Magneto Was Right huh?  
 
Forty four students to a man who say many more than that killed daily? Then when he went to go hunt down Nazi's he had government agencies (aka humans) actually... end up wanting to protect the Nazi's because they had self serving reasons to? Not only had the government did nothing, they actually gave privileges to the war criminals? You don't think this gives him the right to exact retribution or justice? Well.. thats the thing isn't it. Retribution or justice ain't as easy as pointing a gun at a bad guy and saying bang. So what makes one think Storm doesn't want retribution or justice? Retribution or justice only comes with a bullet to the head?  
 
You have a bunch of telepaths, geniuses, who can travel across dimensions and galaxies, you have a guy who can cure cancer, teleporters, a guy who can actually build anything he wants, various half immortals, super technology, pre cogs, and yeah... running out of options... sure... its a numbers thing. This is not the first time a person has been killed in X-Books for being a mutant and so why for so many years was a no killing policy enacted? Did they not know of the concept of justice? Maybe its a bit more complicated than that... 
 
 
@Timandm said:

So, let's compare that, to the times SHE killed... In the latest adjectiveless X-Men, she ordered the X-Men to kill the brood. They had not yet killed a single X-Man... Even if they had, there would only have been four deaths... How can she think the value of the lives of 44 students are so much less than the lives of 4 X-Men.

Or, we could think about the fact that Storm killed Marrow, who hadn't killed ANY of the students or ANY of the X-Men... None whatsoever... Marrow HAD killed normal humans, and could have been arrested and tried... It was completely within Storm's capabilities to take Marrow into custody... But instead, she made a judgement call, and ripped Marrow's heart out... (Retconned later such that Marrow had two hearts and accelerated healing...) How can Storm say it's okay for her to kill Marrow for murdering people, but not okay for X-Force to kill extremists who not only had killed 44 students, but were well armed and already planning to kill more.?

How could her judgement of their different situations be THAT different? Marrow, was one person with a low level power that could easily have been captured, jailed and tried who had killed NO students or X-Men... The purifiers was a large organization of well armed trained terrorists who had murdered 44 students and intended to murder more....

It's just too far beyond reason or logic... No?


 Well, your still working off a flawed premise from above. Storm is aware of the other X-Men who have been in situations where they have killed and accepted their actions. Or felt like they were justified and her actions with Marrow, are different to X-Force's actions. Vastly different. In multiple contexts. Newspaper tomorrow? Mutant kills mutant in knife fight? Or, Leader of entire mutant race forms assassination squad to kill and take out ant mutant groups?  
 
In Storm's situation, what alternatives did she have? What alternatives did X-Force have? So again, you could with your discretion, actually accuse Storm of flawed thinking or projecting idealism or faulty perceptions. Me as a reader that is what I think is the intent of the writers. Not writing her (or Cyclops) as hypocrites.  
 
I don't think its too far beyond reason or logic no. I just broke it down pretty logically and I could further more so. Its about angles. 
Moderator
Posted by JediXMan
@SC
 
That's weird. Why'd I get a notification message?
Moderator
Posted by Vance Astro
@Gambit1024 said:

Nothing about this thread is beautiful.

Fixed.
Moderator
Posted by Gambit1024

@Vance Astro said:

@Gambit1024 said:

Nothing about this thread is beautiful.

Fixed.

Lies.

Posted by SC
@JediXMan said:
@SC:   That's weird. Why'd I get a notification message?
 
You've identified me as an enemy of the mutant race and so you are keeping tabs on me, in case you need to send the X-Force after me.... *eye brow raise...*  
 
Actually sorry, much more mundane, I quoted Tim and I did delete where he replied to you out of his quote (he replied to both of us at the same time) and that should mean you get no notification but atlas, it seems some hidden code stuff must have triggered a notification towards you, sorry bout that boss. 
Moderator
Posted by Timandm

@SC: So Magneto Was Right huh?

At which point? When he attacked the ones who attacked Danielle Moonstar and he 'convinced' them to turn themselves into the local authorities.. Yes, he was right...

When he subjugated all of Necrosha under his rule? He was wrong...

When he sank the Submarine Leningrad before it could nuke his island? Yes, he was right.

Storm DID have alternatives.... She absolutely did not have to kill Marrow. She did not... Marrow could have been captured... But she chose to kill her.

In Astonishing X-Men she did not have to kill the Brood. The proof of that is that 1: she hadn't planned on killing them until after the queen disconnected the young broodling and 2: the fact that they DIDN'T kill them all but rather took them into captivity. She and T'Challa did not HAVE to kill every single Skrull. There was no need. They could have taken prisoners... The chose not to. What alternatives did she have? LOTS of them...

But 'what alternatives' did X-Force have? That's a good question...

Let's say Xavier's had 200 students.... How many should they let be murdered before they go beyond simply capturing and disarming? If 44 students murdered wasn't enough to take extreme measures, would 100 be enough? Would Storm say, "Okay, 150 students have been murdered so NOW we can start killing the terrorists killing us..." Seriously, at which point do you move beyond the purely defensive?

But even that is beyond the scope of what I'm getting at here... There are clearly times when Storm kills where she did not ABSOLUTELY Have to... But, she chose to because it was STILL the right thing to do... She did not kill simply because there was NO other option... She killed because it was the BEST option...

What exactly is her argument for X-Force being an abomination? How is what they did WORSE?

Posted by JediXMan
@SC said:
@JediXMan said:
@SC:   That's weird. Why'd I get a notification message?
 You've identified me as an enemy of the mutant race and so you are keeping tabs on me, in case you need to send the X-Force after me.... *eye brow raise...*   Actually sorry, much more mundane, I quoted Tim and I did delete where he replied to you out of his quote (he replied to both of us at the same time) and that should mean you get no notification but atlas, it seems some hidden code stuff must have triggered a notification towards you, sorry bout that boss. 
No problem. I kinda figured that was what happened.
Moderator
Posted by BlackArmor
@SC said:

"When '' I " lie it is always for a good reason, but when OTHERS lie they're just being dishonorable asshats"

 More like, when some lie for a good reason, its a good reason, when others lie for dishonorable reasons, they are being dishonorable.  
 
               


And there in lies the argument who's to say when it's a "good reason" who's to say when it's honorable or right or justified or necisaary who Bill Cosby? it's not storms place to say when something like this needs to be done it's not her job to sighn off on when killing is necissary just like it's not her job to judge others for something she has done herself on multiple ocasions. you can argue that killing is never justified, in comics thats been argued alot but at the end of the day storm can justify her killing all day but she still would have killed no diffrent than wolverine or X-foarce and that is why I believe she's a hypocrite.
Posted by JediXMan
@BlackArmor
 
-_-
 
Alright, this is just getting irritating.
Moderator
Posted by SC
@Timandm said:

@SC: So Magneto Was Right huh?

At which point? When he attacked the ones who attacked Danielle Moonstar and he 'convinced' them to turn themselves into the local authorities.. Yes, he was right...

When he subjugated all of Necrosha under his rule? He was wrong...

When he sank the Submarine Leningrad before it could nuke his island? Yes, he was right.

Storm DID have alternatives.... She absolutely did not have to kill Marrow. She did not... Marrow could have been captured... But she chose to kill her.

In Astonishing X-Men she did not have to kill the Brood. The proof of that is that 1: she hadn't planned on killing them until after the queen disconnected the young broodling and 2: the fact that they DIDN'T kill them all but rather took them into captivity. She and T'Challa did not HAVE to kill every single Skrull. There was no need. They could have taken prisoners... The chose not to. What alternatives did she have? LOTS of them...

But 'what alternatives' did X-Force have? That's a good question...

Let's say Xavier's had 200 students.... How many should they let be murdered before they go beyond simply capturing and disarming? If 44 students murdered wasn't enough to take extreme measures, would 100 be enough? Would Storm say, "Okay, 150 students have been murdered so NOW we can start killing the terrorists killing us..." Seriously, at which point do you move beyond the purely defensive?

But even that is beyond the scope of what I'm getting at here... There are clearly times when Storm kills where she did not ABSOLUTELY Have to... But, she chose to because it was STILL the right thing to do... She did not kill simply because there was NO other option... She killed because it was the BEST option...

What exactly is her argument for X-Force being an abomination? How is what they did WORSE?

 
So Magneto has exercised discretion you could say?  
 
I am not sure I said that Storm didn't have alternatives? Of course she absolutely didn't have to kill Marrow. So again... could be said that she practiced discretion?  
 
Same applies with the Brood. Not sure if anyone is advocating that when Storm is around that things get simple? (lol)  
 
As for alternatives for X-Force? Well why did any student have to be murdered? Why start then? Is this the first time someone associated with X-men has been murdered? Do the X-Men only build mansion security to deal with Juggernaut, Eye Scream, Blob?!?! Guy with a rocket launcher is too mundane?  
 
Killing the terrorists killing us, is always the best way to making sure them stop right? Wait.. so again, Magneto was right yes? Why is the only move beyond defensive killing? Its one option sure, and sometimes the best, sure, but its about discretion. X-Men aren't playing a game of football with just defense and attack. They live in a world analogous to our own, which can be simple if one wants, but also pretty complicated (as you know)  
 
I don't disagree with you that that Storm has exercised discretion, but differences in actions does not always indicate hypocrisy. She chose because she felt/thought it was the right to do. Contrary to some fans opinion, Storm is not omnipotent lol, she could be wrong, that's sort of the point and beauty of it. She again, killed because she might have thought it was the best option, not necessarily that it was.  
 
I can't argue for Storm, but there are lots of arguments for her thinking X-Force's actions were wrong. Including that act of preparation and premeditated aspect. There's always responsibility as well. Maybe Storm was willing to take responsibility for her actions. Maybe she believed that in this sense, her actions would and could only be attributed to her. With X-Force however, the actions implicate the entire mutant species. If not in a direct way but a perceptive way. Maybe she figured the consequences of her actions would not endanger many or any beyond herself? X-Forces actions actually, may have huge consequences for all mutants. I could go on for a while, I could include reasons I do or don't agree with, but I mean, surely these aspects others can think of as well as far as how they could be seen from the Storm character's perspective? 
Moderator
Posted by SC
@BlackArmor said:
@SC said:

"When '' I " lie it is always for a good reason, but when OTHERS lie they're just being dishonorable asshats"

 More like, when some lie for a good reason, its a good reason, when others lie for dishonorable reasons, they are being dishonorable.  
 
               
And there in lies the argument who's to say when it's a "good reason" who's to say when it's honorable or right or justified or necisaary who Bill Cosby? it's not storms place to say when something like this needs to be done it's not her job to sighn off on when killing is necissary just like it's not her job to judge others for something she has done herself on multiple ocasions. you can argue that killing is never justified, in comics thats been argued alot but at the end of the day storm can justify her killing all day but she still would have killed no diffrent than wolverine or X-foarce and that is why I believe she's a hypocrite.
 
That's not really an argument though. You can. That's who gets to decide what's honorable or right. As long as you are under no illusion that you have the power to force your understanding onto others. Though, if you wished to appeal to someone's intellect, knowledge, reason and so on, that is one way to get your point across.  
 
I am not sure where Storm has appointed herself such a job, but she can certainly voice her opinion no?  
 
Just like you can believe she is an hypocrite I belief you oversimplify the situation to such an extent that you damn Wolverine and Cyclops with your argument because if those three characters kill and Magneto and Sabretooth and Mr Sinister kill and its only about killing and none of the subtle nuisances, and degrees of difference and so on, that actually distinguish each act then Wolverine and Storm and Cyclops are hypocrites as well. Except me personally? I don't think its that simple. 
Moderator
Posted by Timandm

@SC:did Magneto practice discretion?

Um.. At some point in his life, absolutely... He's done a lot of things... I could only address them on an issue by issue basis...

You did not say Storm didn't have alternatives. You asked what alternatives she had... I thought you were implying that there simply weren't any other viable alternatives. Was I wrong?

Killing the terrorists killing us, is always the best way to making sure them stop right?

"Always?" No... At times? Absolutely. Sometimes there is NO other way...

Killing the terrorists killing us, is always the best way to making sure them stop right? Wait.. so again, Magneto was right yes? Why is the only move beyond defensive killing? Its one option sure, and sometimes the best, sure, but its about discretion. X-Men aren't playing a game of football with just defense and attack. They live in a world analogous to our own, which can be simple if one wants, but also pretty complicated (as you know)

A better question is, "Why is Storm the only one qualified to decide when killing IS necessary?" She's saying Scott isn't. She's saying Logan isn't... So, why her? You ask a lot of questions, but why is she the only one wise enough to know the right answer?

We're drifting away from the point... Storm kills. Storm has killed a lot. Not compared to Wolverine, mind you, but still the numbers are high. (thinking of Brood and Skrull). She made a judgment call on a number of occasions and killed.... Logan and Scott did the same thing. I honestly don't see THAT big of a difference between the reasons she killed and the reasons they killed. I just don't... Nearly fifty students dead, and more were scheduled to die... The stopped it the best way they knew how. Storm could maybe argue a point or two here, but to believe HER killing was SO MUCH MORE justified, and necessary, and righteous than theirs.... I still think that's hypocritical... I don't think it's a simple case of "she was obviously right" and "they were obviously wrong."

Posted by SC
@Timandm said:

@SC:did Magneto practice discretion?

Um.. At some point in his life, absolutely... He's done a lot of things... I could only address them on an issue by issue basis...

You did not say Storm didn't have alternatives. You asked what alternatives she had... I thought you were implying that there simply weren't any other viable alternatives. Was I wrong?

Killing the terrorists killing us, is always the best way to making sure them stop right?

"Always?" No... At times? Absolutely. Sometimes there is NO other way...

Killing the terrorists killing us, is always the best way to making sure them stop right? Wait.. so again, Magneto was right yes? Why is the only move beyond defensive killing? Its one option sure, and sometimes the best, sure, but its about discretion. X-Men aren't playing a game of football with just defense and attack. They live in a world analogous to our own, which can be simple if one wants, but also pretty complicated (as you know)

A better question is, "Why is Storm the only one qualified to decide when killing IS necessary?" She's saying Scott isn't. She's saying Logan isn't... So, why her? You ask a lot of questions, but why is she the only one wise enough to know the right answer?

We're drifting away from the point... Storm kills. Storm has killed a lot. Not compared to Wolverine, mind you, but still the numbers are high. (thinking of Brood and Skrull). She made a judgment call on a number of occasions and killed.... Logan and Scott did the same thing. I honestly don't see THAT big of a difference between the reasons she killed and the reasons they killed. I just don't... Nearly fifty students dead, and more were scheduled to die... The stopped it the best way they knew how. Storm could maybe argue a point or two here, but to believe HER killing was SO MUCH MORE justified, and necessary, and righteous than theirs.... I still think that's hypocritical... I don't think it's a simple case of "she was obviously right" and "they were obviously wrong."

 
Yes you were wrong. I was not implying that Storm had.. well, she definitely had alternatives from my perspective, how viable they were isn't up to me, since I am not Storm, so to me, how viable they are becomes an exercise of... de...de.. discretion.  
 
I'd like to throw in the word 'viable' to your line of "Sometimes there is NO other way..." to make it "Sometimes there is NO other viable way..." is that okay, and then I would argue to you, the viability of any given action? Can such things be increased? Decreased? Is intelligence a factor? Wisdom? Experience? Resources? So on.  
 
Who said Storm is the only qualified one to decide when killing is necessary? I can see why she could think Cyclops isn't as far as X-Force and Wolverine as well as far as X-Force. I mean, if we really want to get into details, why is a black ops team running around using the traditional X logo's plastered all over their uniforms? lol  
 
Why is there this idea that Storm is the only one wise enough to know the right answer? I'm refuting the idea that she is a hypocrite not whether she would make better decisions or is the wisest of the wise men.  
 
That's sort of the point though. I mean, if you don't honestly see that big of a difference, all the power to you, I know some other people who genuinely and sincerely believe that Cyclops is the new (old) Magneto, for similar reasons with their actions. Me personally I see a lot of differences with everything, not necessarily agree or disagree, but there are differences present which leave room for interpretation.  
 
Me myself, I am not sure if you have noticed, but I have been advocating that its never simple case of obviously right or obviously wrong, instead, obviously right according to the character hence their actions and attitudes. (can provide great story material if done right) Thus to me, I don't think its as simple as her being obviously hypocritical and them not being obviously hypocritical, since same premise applies. 
Moderator
Posted by BlackArmor
@SC

On alot of levels your right but you point out something important you do decide what you personally view as honorable and justified but you can't foarce a general consensus among your peers over the matter. My originol argument works better as an argument for not arguing about it because something as big as killing and oneds view point of it is tied so completly to a persons morals that it would be very hard too convince someone as wrong. That being said my final point still stands and i don't believe i am over simplifying things or damning anyone like others on this thread i believe Cycke didn't go far enough.killing is killing wolverine said once you kill you can't go back your a killer forever and if we all agree by that definition that storm is indeed a killer than this argument that may or may not be unwinable becomes signiffigantly more simple the answer to is storm a hypocrite now falls under the questions is killing ever justified and what does it take to make it justified if we arive at those answers than we could probably come to an agreement over whether or not storm is a hypocrite however once again opinion plays heavily into it. For time puposes i'm leaving the argument with i think storm is a hypocrite, and additianly the opinion that she needs to step down from her high horse

I will admit in closing that you make an excellent point about damning Cycke Wolverine along with the assorted X-villians and i will have to contemplate this point.
Posted by SC
@BlackArmor said:
@SC: On alot of levels your right but you point out something important you do decide what you personally view as honorable and justified but you can't foarce a general consensus among your peers over the matter. My originol argument works better as an argument for not arguing about it because something as big as killing and oneds view point of it is tied so completly to a persons morals that it would be very hard too convince someone as wrong. That being said my final point still stands and i don't believe i am over simplifying things or damning anyone like others on this thread i believe Cycke didn't go far enough.killing is killing wolverine said once you kill you can't go back your a killer forever and if we all agree by that definition that storm is indeed a killer than this argument that may or may not be unwinable becomes signiffigantly more simple the answer to is storm a hypocrite now falls under the questions is killing ever justified and what does it take to make it justified if we arive at those answers than we could probably come to an agreement over whether or not storm is a hypocrite however once again opinion plays heavily into it. For time puposes i'm leaving the argument with i think storm is a hypocrite, and additianly the opinion that she needs to step down from her high horse I will admit in closing that you make an excellent point about damning Cycke Wolverine along with the assorted X-villians and i will have to contemplate this point.
 
Well to me there are big differences say in killing a bad guy who goes around killing people to killing a small child? I mean, obviously there are huge differences. So Wolverine can say that once you kill your a killer, but that doesn't mean that a "killer" doesn't exercise discretion between killing a murderer and killing a child. Wolverine knows this himself, and when you allow there to be room for killing some and killing others you recognize that there is room for choice and choices are a funny thing. This is where my point about oversimplification came in. Wolverine (in Ultimates but this is just for a point) has actually killed a kid before. Relatively innocent kid too. Young teenager. Mutant powers caused him to accidentally kill a bunch of people. He had no control over power and well. So yeah Wolverine killed him, because that seemed to be for the best. Now Idie and X-23 are teenagers and have killed and not even accidentally... and Wolverine won't kill them... but there are some relatively obvious reasons why he won't here. They have control, they were killing "bad" people and they were bad by Wolverine's moral code and also pretty bad in objective terms too. So is Wolverine a hypocrite? No, not really. Characters might share some similarities (teenagers, mutants, killed people) but their are some differences too (intent, control, method of killing) and so the details absolve Wolverine of hypocrisy unless you focus on the similarities and not the differences. So in similar vein such logic can be applied to any character (like Storm). Differences versus similarities and the values and perceived relevance of each.  
 
Cheers. I do understand where your coming from and its a fair assessment. 
Moderator
Posted by Timandm

@SC: I'd like to throw in the word 'viable' to your line of "Sometimes there is NO other way..." to make it "Sometimes there is NO other viable way..."

I took that to be a given, but okay.

the viability of any given action? Can such things be increased? Decreased? Is intelligence a factor? Wisdom? Experience? Resources? So on.

Yes, they can... That was an easy one, especially since you asked if they could be "increased" / "decreased"... But, naturally, they can be changed/altered/improved/made better...

Who said Storm is the only qualified one to decide when killing is necessary?

Well, she does... She's killed and clearly she believes she's been absolutely right every single time.... Whereas Scott and Logan were completely, and in all ways possible, wrong... She knows EVERYTHING she needs to know about what they did and why they did it and she has determined that it was an abomination. So much so that she considers no longer being Wolverine's friend and associate.

That's sort of the point though. I mean, if you don't honestly see that big of a difference, all the power to you, I know some other people who genuinely and sincerely believe that Cyclops is the new (old) Magneto,

Yes, I've heard that... and not by a far cry...

But I do think Magneto has been, and likely always will be, not understood by the younger generations... How many people today can really imagine what it would have been like to have been a prisoner in a nazi death camp?

You're a child being treated worse than animals in a slaughter house. You watch your parents being gassed, burned alive, or shot... You watch their lifeless bodies fall into a mass grave with hundreds, if not thousands, of others of your own race... You are starved.. infested with lice...watch as young girls are repeatedly raped, and gold is torn from the mouths of the bodies of your family... More than 21 MILLION of your people starved, raped, tortured, robbed, beaten, humiliated, burned, frozen and killed......... A teenage boy who suffered through something like that.... How will he view the world after her survives???

How many of us would be all that different? I've had to put up with some minor racial problems... Physical attacks when I was kid... Clubs my brothers and sisters and I couldn't join because we weren't white. Jobs I didn't get promoted into because I didn't "play golf at the same club as the good ole boys.' Fathers who said I couldn't pick their daughters up at their house because I was nigger... (btw, I'm Hawaiian not African American but one doesn't expect a racist to be anything less than ignorant.) But I've NEVER suffered anything even remotely close to what the victims of the Holocaust went through. And God Willing I never will... But even what little I have had to deal with, has affected my view of the world. I have BEEN surrounded by police with their hands near their guns just looking for a reason to shoot... Damn... That DOES effect you... And no, I've never broken a serious law.. That I can remember? I've had a few speeding and parking tickets... There are still places in Georgia and Alabama that I have to be careful about venturing into...

But, thinking of the effect that even ONE incident had on me. FIVE freaking police surrounding me.... Two larger than me and muscular... all of them armed... I'm digressing...

Magneto... Eric Lensher suffered things that many of the readers back in the sixties could still remember and comprehend... The closest most of us could come to an understanding, is perhaps to watch Schindler's List.... ANYONE who wants to really understand Magneto, should watch THAT movie... Then, they should imagine themselves in that situation... Beaten, raped, humiliated, stripped of all human dignity, maybe spending a few days hiding neck deep in raw sewage.... ENTIRELY because of racial hatred.... NOW, you have just the beginnings of Magneto...

So... If I had been through that, and a submarine came my way to destroy MY island and my people.. Would I sink it? Without hesitation and without regret. I have no doubt...

Do I agree with all of magnetos decisions? LOL! Of course not... He's been evil... But can I see him being willing to kill to protect his own from racists and hatred? How could I not?

Posted by SC
@Timandm said:

@SC: I'd like to throw in the word 'viable' to your line of "Sometimes there is NO other way..." to make it "Sometimes there is NO other viable way..."

I took that to be a given, but okay.

 
Exactly, but see, and this for me is where the conversation goes weird, a lot of what everyone I saying I find is a given. My own points included. So with you'll post I'll just try and skip to places where its more ambiguous?  
 
@Timandm said:

Who said Storm is the only qualified one to decide when killing is necessary?

Well, she does... She's killed and clearly she believes she's been absolutely right every single time.... 

  
You arrived to this conclusion how? There is no room for interpretation with your statement here? She didn't just feel she did what she thought was right, she actually feels and thinks that she is absolutely right? No room for different outcomes? Then how does that indicate even with that in account that she as a person is granted this exclusivity and others are not? Like you have stated your opinion and even provided reasoning does this mean you think you are the best qualified to determine and attribute characterization to Storm? Over all others, by virtue of you expressing your stance?  
 
@Timandm said:

Whereas Scott and Logan were completely, and in all ways possible, wrong... She knows EVERYTHING she needs to know about what they did and why they did it and she has determined that it was an abomination. So much so that she considers no longer being Wolverine's friend and associate.


 She's not them though. She can't think or feel like them, and nor can they like her. So I'd argue that all three actually, have room to know more.  
 
@Timandm said:

Do I agree with all of magnetos decisions? LOL! Of course not... He's been evil... But can I see him being willing to kill to protect his own from racists and hatred? How could I not?

 
That's a nice write up and I appreciate it *smile* I agree with all you wrote. Well, I mean, I echo agreement to parts where you agree and parts where you point out you don't agree. Still I discern Cyclops actions from Magnetos. I don't consider Cyclops a hypocrite, even though once upon a time he said X-Men don't kill... I think it was no matter what. Something along those lines. Since you could say the character has grown. Is maybe more cynical, less naive, what have you. That doesn't mean I think he is right and Magneto was wrong. I think Magneto was a victim of circumstance, in the sense, he was sent down a path (well designed to be sent down a path) that would make him a antagonist. Cyclops appears to be wished to be seen as a protagonist and well clashing protagonists are always interesting plot turn, but when dealing with matters or morality and fiction, well you want conflict and at the same time either Cyclops or Wolverine or Storm can be sent down roads to becoming villains/antagonists and that can be by exaggerating or emphasizing traits that turn the character into a hypocrite (Magneto has had some close human friendships, viewed some humans as equals and then also held his belief of superiority (then the whole other hypocrisy involved with the character that makes him tragic) and or ignorance... oh like many of the human X-Villains. I think Storm is more in danger of being ignorant though way of idealism. (potentially) but since writer intent is really more from what I can tell about protagonists versus protagonists its more about these three characters ideals? being different. All three can be tagged as being hypocrites and per your discretion as a reader can be, I think thats sort of the point. My discretion leads me to not finding either Wolverine, or Cyclops or Storm as hypocrites. Stubborn, strong willed, doing what they think is right? Being fallible and flawed? Outspoken? Exercising discretion? All these things. 
Moderator
Posted by Timandm

@SC: You arrived to this conclusion how? There is no room for interpretation with your statement here? She didn't just feel she did what she thought was right, she actually feels and thinks that she is absolutely right?

I have no doubt that she did what she thought was right. I have no doubt that she feels and things that she is absolutely right. I think that's completely accurate... She DOES believe what she said....

Men who cheat on their wives often believe that men NEED to cheat because "men have needs..." But they honestly believe it's wrong for their wives to cheat on THEM... The whole, "I can't satisfy her needs whenever she wants" attitude... There really are men who live this way... They honestly believe what they're doing is right. They honestly believe it would be wrong for their wives to do the same... Those men ARE hypocrites...

I am by no means suggesting that Storm is PRETENDING to believe she has killed for the right reasons and X-Force killed for the wrong reasons. She HONESTLY believes that.

Most hypocrites aren't aware of their own hypocrisy... Ever listened in a conversation in which most of the sentences began with, " I'm not a racist, but have you ever noticed how "fill in the ethnicity of your choice here" always ..... "

Chances are if you're using a sentence that begins with, "I'm not a racist but ever notice how " " people always...." you ARE a racist... But you don't BELIEVE you are... You believe what you feel is right. You believe your understanding of the situation is right...

She's not them though. She can't think or feel like them, and nor can they like her. So I'd argue that all three actually, have room to know more.

True...But then neither of them called her an abomination or threatened to have nothing more to do with her....

even though once upon a time he said X-Men don't kill...

Shoot, he said even AFTER he had killed... more than once... Cassandra what'shername (he blasted out her heart), the guy with three faces (it was a mercy killing), Brood, and some others I'm too tired to remember...

I could see someone arguing that Wolverine is being a hypocrite. I wouldn't agree but I could see where they're coming from... But he's gone through a drastic change and he's different now... But even throughout the years, depending on who the writer is, Wolverine is a unkempt, foul mouthed thug, or a wisened, samurai father figure...

Cyclops... I could easily make the argument that he's a hypocrite... but I'll save that for another day.

But Storm... Well, you know my opinion... and if I see her on her high horse about Wolverine again, I'm scratching the wind-blown tart off my Christmas list...

Posted by THUNDERBOLT30

@Timandm: I think you are completely wrong in thinking Storm is a hypocrite. She is justified in her disgust with Scott's decision to create X-Force (though personally I agree with him). When has Storm ever condoned murder? All of the scans you posted support that killing was the option of last resort for Storm. Murder is what X-Force did/does, and that is totally different from killing when it is necessary. Proactively going out and pursuing the X-Men's enemies to kill them to neutralize the threat they represent to the mutant species is only reasonable to the extent that it is in a human's (or mutants) nature to survive by any means necessary, and I think that is what was needed in order for their species to survive. However, it is still murder no matter the justification, and Storm is being true ot her character by being opposed to it. For Storm to condone Scott's actions....that WOULD make her a hypocrite.

Posted by SC
@Timandm said:

I have no doubt that she did what she thought was right. I have no doubt that she feels and things that she is absolutely right. I think that's completely accurate... She DOES believe what she said....

 
Men who cheat on their wives often believe that men NEED to cheat because "men have needs..." But they honestly believe it's wrong for their wives to cheat on THEM... The whole, "I can't satisfy her needs whenever she wants" attitude... There really are men who live this way... They honestly believe what they're doing is right. They honestly believe it would be wrong for their wives to do the same... Those men ARE hypocrites...
 

I am by no means suggesting that Storm is PRETENDING to believe she has killed for the right reasons and X-Force killed for the wrong reasons. She HONESTLY believes that.

Most hypocrites aren't aware of their own hypocrisy... Ever listened in a conversation in which most of the sentences began with, " I'm not a racist, but have you ever noticed how "fill in the ethnicity of your choice here" always ..... "

Chances are if you're using a sentence that begins with, "I'm not a racist but ever notice how " " people always...." you ARE a racist... But you don't BELIEVE you are... You believe what you feel is right. You believe your understanding of the situation is right...

 
Except your points here essentially mean that everyone is a hypocrite. lol That is, unless you personally can distinguish the differences that might reasonably justify make them not so... like your Wolverine thread I think?  
 
I tend to think most hypocrites aren't articulate enough to actually adequately demonstrate why they aren't hypocrites or justification for holding a stance that might be otherwise seen as hypocritical.  
  
@Timandm said:

True...But then neither of them called her an abomination or threatened to have nothing more to do with her....

 
Maybe she expects higher of them, than they do of her? Maybe they underestimated her ability to compromise. Maybe she overestimated the trust they hold in her/trust she extended to them. Dozens of valid reasons for each of them to act the way they do without making any of them hypocrites. She might feel their betrayed her friendship and thus her words are bitter with emotion. Perhaps as they are standing up for their ideals she is standing up for her own?  
 
@Timandm said:

Shoot, he said even AFTER he had killed... more than once... Cassandra what'shername (he blasted out her heart), the guy with three faces (it was a mercy killing), Brood, and some others I'm too tired to remember...

I could see someone arguing that Wolverine is being a hypocrite. I wouldn't agree but I could see where they're coming from... But he's gone through a drastic change and he's different now... But even throughout the years, depending on who the writer is, Wolverine is a unkempt, foul mouthed thug, or a wisened, samurai father figure...

Cyclops... I could easily make the argument that he's a hypocrite... but I'll save that for another day.

But Storm... Well, you know my opinion... and if I see her on her high horse about Wolverine again, I'm scratching the wind-blown tart off my Christmas list...


Oh, I'm just remembering after one particular time. Way back, maybe in the 90's issues? Another character was saying that circumstances might change and if you have your back against the wall and, but Cyke was really vehement. On the basis that if they started killing enemies, like going after them, then they are the same something along those lines. Of course different writers. Now the no matter is more like... well... sometimes...  
 
Well I too could make arguments for all three characters being hypocrites. I just don't view them as, and don't think at the core of their beings, that's what writers are trying to sell us. Then again, I like all three characters about the same. I always considered that flirtation between Ororo and James... lol 
Moderator
Posted by super_psycho

Was that necessary?

Posted by Timandm

@THUNDERBOLT30 said:

@Timandm: I think you are completely wrong in thinking Storm is a hypocrite. She is justified in her disgust with Scott's decision to create X-Force (though personally I agree with him). When has Storm ever condoned murder? All of the scans you posted support that killing was the option of last resort for Storm. Murder is what X-Force did/does, and that is totally different from killing when it is necessary. Proactively going out and pursuing the X-Men's enemies to kill them to neutralize the threat they represent to the mutant species is only reasonable to the extent that it is in a human's (or mutants) nature to survive by any means necessary, and I think that is what was needed in order for their species to survive. However, it is still murder no matter the justification, and Storm is being true ot her character by being opposed to it. For Storm to condone Scott's actions....that WOULD make her a hypocrite.

I guess if you see what X-Force does as murder, then we see it differently...

But then you have to also see Storm killing Marrow as murder as well. She did not HAVE to kill Marrow. It wasn't necesarry. No lives were in jeopardy. Storm could easily have taken Marrow alive. Storm's life was not in jeopardy when she killed the Brood and gave the order to kill them. The X-Men were already winning... She did not HAVE to kill. Storm did not have to kill every single Skrull... It was not necessary... So, is Storm a murderer as well? She killed when she did not absolutely HAVE TO... lives were not at risk every time she killed.

Also, I HAVE to ask.. Why do people automatically jump to Storm's defense without actually reading what I posted??? Why is that? You've done that here... You HAVE. Look at your comment, then go back and read what I ACTUALLY posted rather than what you THINK I posted...

When has Storm ever condoned murder?

Those are YOUR words... I copy and pasted them... This tells me you did NOT read what was posted... you only ASSUME you know what my opinion is and you ASSUME you know what I'm saying... Not only have I NEVER said Storm condones murder, I have said Storm only kills when it's necessary. I SAID THAT... Here, allow me to copy and paste what you did not read before you assumed you knew my opinion...

  1. Storm does not take killing lightly.

  2. Storm does not enjoy killing.

  3. But Storm DOES KILL WHEN NECESSARY. (please note that I said WHEN NECESSARY)

I stated that at the VERY beginning of this thread. I NUMBERED it so it would stand out... So, tell me....

- Did you read those three things and get, "Storm condones murder" from that list?

or

- Did you NOT READ the post before you commented?

Nevertheless... I do not believe one "murders" the enemy in a war... I believe one "kills" the enemy in a war... I have never been in the military, so I've never been in a war, but I have had friends and family who have been in war and they have killed... I would NEVER call any of them murderers... But that's me... Perhaps you think of the men and women who fight and kill in wars to protect their countries as murderers... I can't identify with that at all... But we'll simply have to agree to disagree on that one....

The purifiers were at WAR with mutants. The purifiers had MURDERED nearly fifty students and were planning to murder more... It was a war... In a war you do not murder the enemy... you kill them...

I've known a good number of men who served in Vietnam... Some of them are still messed up... But they're not just messed up by what happened in the war, but by what happened to them when they came back home... Rather than being received honorably by a grateful country, they were came home to protests, pickets, shouting, being spit on, and people calling them baby killers.... People calling them murderers.... Point blank, that's fucked up... There's no other way to say it...

MUTANTS WERE BEING EXTERMINATED BY THE PURIFIERS... EXTERMINATED... A small group of mutants fought back and killed the purifiers... You HAVE called them murderers...

WWII... The Nazi party had, as it's goal, the EXTERMINATION OF ALL JEWISH PEOPLE... (Course, they were only the beginning.) They did not make an open declaration of war against Israel... There was no formal declaration of war... They simply started rounding up and killing the Jews... Some of those Jews fought back and killed the Nazis... YOU would call those Jewish people who killed Nazis, 'murderers.'

The Nazis came close to succeeding... Maybe those Jewish people WEREN'T wrong to fight back?

Posted by Timandm

@super_psycho said:

Was that necessary?

You mean playing a round of speed chess between posts? Necessary to sustain life? NO... but I enjoyed it... Why do you ask?

Posted by super_psycho

@Timandm said:

@super_psycho said:

Was that necessary?

You mean playing a round of speed chess between posts? Necessary to sustain life? NO... but I enjoyed it... Why do you ask?

Because you ain't going to change their minds not saying that you are wrong but you know about them very well. right?

Posted by Timandm

@SC: I think we have different opinions of what a hypocrite is...

Mine, I think, is more black and white than yours.. for me:

A person who engages in the same behaviors he condemns others for.

If you drive a car and believe it is right for you to drive, but you condemn others for driving cars... You're a hypocrite... (Let's please leave out obvious exceptions like traffic cops, Presidential chauffeur... etc..)

If you drink whiskey, but you condemn others for drinking alcohol...You're a hypocrite...

For me, their reasons don't matter... Holding others to a higher moral standard than your own is just wrong... (technically I guess it could also be a lower moral standard)

You're looking deeper into Storm's motivations, beliefs, understanding of the events, etc..... I'm looking at Storm killing when necessary.... and X-Force killing when necessary... I'm a simple person. I like things simple...

Posted by Timandm

@super_psycho: I guess I'm Don Quixote tonight... :-)

I realize that fanboys will NEVER consider their hero logically... A Storm fanboy could read about Storm burning down a children's cancer ward and still believe she's a goddess that's the best thing to happen to mankind since the creation of the orgasm....

HOWEVER, there are those, like my friend S.C. here, how really do have an opinion of their own, and reasons for what they believe...AND the ability to express those opinions in ways that even a simpleton like myself can understand... I might not agree, but I can understand... It's a good discussion...

Posted by SC
@Timandm said:

@SC: I think we have different opinions of what a hypocrite is...

Mine, I think, is more black and white than yours.. for me:

A person who engages in the same behaviors he condemns others for.

If you drive a car and believe it is right for you to drive, but you condemn others for driving cars... You're a hypocrite... (Let's please leave out obvious exceptions like traffic cops, Presidential chauffeur... etc..)

If you drink whiskey, but you condemn others for drinking alcohol...You're a hypocrite...

For me, their reasons don't matter... Holding others to a higher moral standard than your own is just wrong... (technically I guess it could also be a lower moral standard)

You're looking deeper into Storm's motivations, beliefs, understanding of the events, etc..... I'm looking at Storm killing when necessary.... and X-Force killing when necessary... I'm a simple person. I like things simple...

 
So a 30 year old man drinking whisky is a hypocrite for condemning a pregnant 4 year old who is driving a truck... wait... *scratches head*  
 
I hope you don't mind me copying and pasting what I said to another poster (but still in your thread)  
 
"This is where my point about oversimplification came in. Wolverine (in Ultimates but this is just for a point) has actually killed a kid before. Relatively innocent kid too. Young teenager. Mutant powers caused him to accidentally kill a bunch of people. He had no control over power and well. So yeah Wolverine killed him, because that seemed to be for the best. Now Idie and X-23 are teenagers and have killed and not even accidentally... and Wolverine won't kill them... but there are some relatively obvious reasons why he won't here. They have control, they were killing "bad" people and they were bad by Wolverine's moral code and also pretty bad in objective terms too. So is Wolverine a hypocrite? No, not really. Characters might share some similarities (teenagers, mutants, killed people) but their are some differences too (intent, control, method of killing) and so the details absolve Wolverine of hypocrisy unless you focus on the similarities and not the differences. So in similar vein such logic can be applied to any character (like Storm). Differences versus similarities and the values and perceived relevance of each" 
 
There'll always be differences and similarities. To me hypocrisy comes with the details. Politician advertises himself as family first, opposed to gay and lesbian couples because they are blah blah - that same politician having a gay orgy in a mens public toilet (not that thats a bad thing) well there, that's a hypocrite. Unless he thought they were all really masculine looking women and plans on marrying them all and is okay with polygamy... and etc then he is just... very confused and possibly deluded. Unless he's a spy and they were aliens... then he is just doing his job and really I mean... really going above and beyond the call of duty. He must have ideals that means he values work to that level. His work as a spy taking out aliens... so depends. 
 
Was it pretty easy and natural for you to come to the conclusion that Wolverine was not a hypocrite in your thread defending him even though many still think he is? For me, I'm looking at Storm with the same amount of effort as I looked at Wolverine to conclude he wasn't. lol Potentially... Storm is a character designed/written to not just to gel well with you? As naturally as others? Or it might just be discretion lol They are fictional. Inconsistency is their middle name. *smile*
Moderator
Posted by super_psycho

@Timandm said:

@super_psycho: I guess I'm Don Quixote tonight... :-)

I realize that fanboys will NEVER consider their hero logically... A Storm fanboy could read about Storm burning down a children's cancer ward and still believe she's a goddess that's the best thing to happen to mankind since the creation of the orgasm....

HOWEVER, there are those, like my friend S.C. here, how really do have an opinion of their own, and reasons for what they believe...AND the ability to express those opinions in ways that even a simpleton like myself can understand... I might not agree, but I can understand... It's a good discussion...

lol yeah right..

Posted by jhazzroucher

All i can say is that it's different when a leader just says "help and do not kill" instead of saying "help and kill when necessary" because the former is encouraging us not to kill while the latter would make us think it's ok to kill for as loing as its necessary. Besides, writers also make mistakes about the character of a character.

@Timandm: it's kinda unfair that you only post scans showing Storm is killing somebody. If i won't be lazy , i can show you more scans of her showing mercy, and when i say more, more examples than what you have.

Posted by THUNDERBOLT30

@Timandm: First of all, don't get condescending because you failed to comprehend my post. I did read your OP, and if you actually read ALL of what you wrote and read the books that contained that scans you posted of Storm killing that you are so wordily taking out of context to support a point that was wrong to begin with, you would have caught on to the point I made in my response to you (which was a lot more respectful than you are coming off but we can go there if you want to). Just so we are clear, here is the comments in your OP I repsonded to:

My point?

1: Storm DOES KILL WHEN NECESSARY. She kills often.

2: Storm judges Wolverine and X-Force for doing exactly what she does. She is saying, for THEM, it is wrong...

WRONG. She did nothing like X-Force did, hence my post.

Killing enemies in a preemptive strike is murder, pure and simple. It was premeditated. It was their intent. It was why X-Force was created with a group of mutants who have killed and can more easily handle the moral/emotional consequences of killing. So like I stated, when has Storm condonded murder? You will find that there are no examples of Storm (at least 616 Storm) proactively going out to find the enemies of the X-Men with the intent to kill them. In the 80's outback run, Storm faked the teams death to protect their loved from getting used/attacked by their enemies and to allow them to strike out at their foes more freely (i.e. - like they did to the Mauraders and to the Reavers). They still remained true to Xavier's dream, and did not once resort to secretly murder their enemies who they knew would and did come back at them again.

In every example you only focus on the fact that Storm has killed, state very boldly that you allegedly understand that it was necessary, and then state how it wasn't??? It is not murder when the threat is iminent, which was the case in all of the scans you were using to support how Storm is a "hypocrite", and it's very clear that she is not. Keeping the scans in context with the story, since it was clearly explained how her actions were necessary...

- IIRC, Marrow had a deviced that was attached to her heart that would set-off an explostion that would kill innocent people unless Storm stopped her. It does not matter that the X-Men were beating them, but that there was an imminent threat to innocent lives they were sworn to protect. That is Xavier's way, and that is the moral code by which Storm has conducted herself. Storm did what was necessary to protect innocents.

- IIRC, the skrulls invaded the entire planet with the intent to infitrate and destroy/subjugate humanity. Storm is a queen and has a moral and ethical obligation to protect her people and preserve the security of her nation (let alone the planet). How is that any different from what our President would do to terrorists who threaten the security of the U.S.? He doesn't spare a few of them and hope they change their minds. He would eliminate the threat as an imminent danger to the people of his nation, the same as Storm did to the skrulls.

- And you are also wrong about the brood as well. All of their lives were in jeopardy.They were infected by the brood, and were going to be used as human incubators to help restart the Broods dying species, and would be killed when they are finally turned into a brood and cease to exist. Even though they intially set out to save the Brood species, the Brood Queen had no intention of allowing the X-Men to survive, let alone escape with the benign brood child that could change their parasitic species to a more peaceful race, which the normal brood found to be weak and unacceptable.The brood queen was about to kill him when Storm saved him on the page preceding your scan.

And I agree, nothing about a war, where soldiers follow orders to protect the country and take lives based on that, is murder, so that rant you gave is not a supportive example to Scott's sanctioning of X-Force since this was not a war scenario. It was not a decision made in the heat of battle. It was a survival decision made behind closed doors. He knew the Purifiers and every other anti-mutant group would come to finish off the remnants of their species, but that is no different than what he has experienced his entire career as an x-man. All of the enemies were neutralized for time and then they came back. They have battled these foes repeatedly, and have triumphed, without compromising the ethics that set them apart from their enemies. The only difference now, is that Scott's species is on the brink of extinction, and he crossed lines and did what was necessary to survive. Understandable and I can respect that, but it still doesn't justify murdering their enemies. This course of action was no different than what their enemies intend to do to the X-Men and that is the point Storm was making. Can the X-Men find a way to hold tight to their ethical code and still save their species? It could have been possible. It may not be. Shoudl that risk even be taken? Me personally, I'd do what Scott did, but that is not Storm's way and has never been. What Cyclops did (putting together a secret team to kill their enemies through preemptive strike) goes against everything the X-Men have stood for(or any super hero team for that matter), and crosses a line that Storm, and most other "heroes", have and would not, since that is not their way.

Posted by jhazzroucher

@THUNDERBOLT30 said:

@Timandm: First of all, don't get condescending because you failed to comprehend my post. I did read your OP, and if you actually read ALL of what you wrote and read the books that contained that scans you posted of Storm killing that you are so wordily taking out of context to support a point that was wrong to begin with, you would have caught on to the point I made in my response to you (which was a lot more respectful than you are coming off but we can go there if you want to). Just so we are clear, here is the comments in your OP I repsonded to:

My point?

1: Storm DOES KILL WHEN NECESSARY. She kills often.

2: Storm judges Wolverine and X-Force for doing exactly what she does. She is saying, for THEM, it is wrong...

WRONG. She did nothing like X-Force did, hence my post.

Killing enemies in a preemptive strike is murder, pure and simple. It was premeditated. It was their intent. It was why X-Force was created with a group of mutants who have killed and can more easily handle the moral/emotional consequences of killing. So like I stated, when has Storm condonded murder? You will find that there are no examples of Storm (at least 616 Storm) proactively going out to find the enemies of the X-Men with the intent to kill them. In the 80's outback run, Storm faked the teams death to protect their loved from getting used/attacked by their enemies and to allow them to strike out at their foes more freely (i.e. - like they did to the Mauraders and to the Reavers). They still remained true to Xavier's dream, and did not once resort to secretly murder their enemies who they knew would and did come back at them again.

In every example you only focus on the fact that Storm has killed, state very boldly that you allegedly understand that it was necessary, and then state how it wasn't??? It is not murder when the threat is iminent, which was the case in all of the scans you were using to support how Storm is a "hypocrite", and it's very clear that she is not. Keeping the scans in context with the story, since it was clearly explained how her actions were necessary...

- IIRC, Marrow had a deviced that was attached to her heart that would set-off an explostion that would kill innocent people unless Storm stopped her. It does not matter that the X-Men were beating them, but that there was an imminent threat to innocent lives they were sworn to protect. That is Xavier's way, and that is the moral code by which Storm has conducted herself. Storm did what was necessary to protect innocents.

- IIRC, the skrulls invaded the entire planet with the intent to infitrate and destroy/subjugate humanity. Storm is a queen and has a moral and ethical obligation to protect her people and preserve the security of her nation (let alone the planet). How is that any different from what our President would do to terrorists who threaten the security of the U.S.? He doesn't spare a few of them and hope they change their minds. He would eliminate the threat as an imminent danger to the people of his nation, the same as Storm did to the skrulls.

- And you are also wrong about the brood as well. All of their lives were in jeopardy.They were infected by the brood, and were going to be used as human incubators to help restart the Broods dying species, and would be killed when they are finally turned into a brood and cease to exist. Even though they intially set out to save the Brood species, the Brood Queen had no intention of allowing the X-Men to survive, let alone escape with the benign brood child that could change their parasitic species to a more peaceful race, which the normal brood found to be weak and unacceptable.The brood queen was about to kill him when Storm saved him on the page preceding your scan.

And I agree, nothing about a war, where soldiers follow orders to protect the country and take lives based on that, is murder, so that rant you gave is not a supportive example to Scott's sanctioning of X-Force since this was not a war scenario. It was not a decision made in the heat of battle. It was a survival decision made behind closed doors. He knew the Purifiers and every other anti-mutant group would come to finish off the remnants of their species, but that is no different than what he has experienced his entire career as an x-man. All of the enemies were neutralized for time and then they came back. They have battled these foes repeatedly, and have triumphed, without compromising the ethics that set them apart from their enemies. The only difference now, is that Scott's species is on the brink of extinction, and he crossed lines and did what was necessary to survive. Understandable and I can respect that, but it still doesn't justify murdering their enemies. This course of action was no different than what their enemies intend to do to the X-Men and that is the point Storm was making. Can the X-Men find a way to hold tight to their ethical code and still save their species? It could have been possible. It may not be. Shoudl that risk even be taken? Me personally, I'd do what Scott did, but that is not Storm's way and has never been. What Cyclops did (putting together a secret team to kill their enemies through preemptive strike) goes against everything the X-Men have stood for(or any super hero team for that matter), and crosses a line that Storm, and most other "heroes", have and would not, since that is not their way.

Thank you for explaining each scenario. I just couldn't cos i haven't really read the whole issue on each scenario given. Thanks TB30. : )

Posted by THUNDERBOLT30

@jhazzroucher: Your welcome :-).

Posted by Timandm

@SC:

So a 30 year old man drinking whisky is a hypocrite for condemning a pregnant 4 year old who is driving a truck... wait... *scratches head*

You know me.... Do you HONESTLY believe that's what I'm saying?

Posted by Timandm

@THUNDERBOLT30: So.... You ARE flat out denying that you said, "When has Storm ever condone Murder?"

That IS what you're suggesting now? You NEVER said that? Really??? HONESTLY? I mean it's RIGHT UP THERE in black and white......

So... You're... um.. denying it?

Posted by SC
@Timandm said:

@SC:

So a 30 year old man drinking whisky is a hypocrite for condemning a pregnant 4 year old who is driving a truck... wait... *scratches head*

You know me.... Do you HONESTLY believe that's what I'm saying?

 
Of course not, but thats what simplicity is, or ignoring context. Like further down on in my post, focusing on the similarities but not the differences. With Storm as well as Cyclops, as well as Wolverine as well as the above intentionally hyper exaggerated example, I make note of as many differences as I can if I think they are relevant eliminating the hypocrisy if required. *smile*
Moderator
Posted by Timandm

@THUNDERBOLT30: However, you're still sticking with that whole,

"people who fight back and kill when their race is being exterminated are murderers" idea, yes?

Nazis - try to exterminate Jews - Jews fight back and kill Nazis in preemptive strikes (I've read the stories.)

Purifiers - try to exterminate mutants - a group of mutants fight back and kill purifiers in preemptive strike. Those mutants are murderers.

For they sake of clarity, that IS what you're saying, isn't it?

Posted by Timandm

@jhazzroucher said:

All i can say is that it's different when a leader just says "help and do not kill" instead of saying "help and kill when necessary" because the former is encouraging us not to kill while the latter would make us think it's ok to kill for as loing as its necessary. Besides, writers also make mistakes about the character of a character.

@Timandm: it's kinda unfair that you only post scans showing Storm is killing somebody. If i won't be lazy , i can show you more scans of her showing mercy, and when i say more, more examples than what you have.

Interesting...

So, if I was to show video evidence that someone could actually swim... I would consider posting images or videos of them SWIMMING...

But you're suggesting, that I should go further and show videos of them NOT swimming as well?

why would I do that?

Can you please show me where I suggested in any way shape or form that Storm never ever shows mercy?

Can you please show me that? Can you PLEASE tell me how my saying that "Storm only kills when necessary" means she never shows mercy???

Posted by jhazzroucher

@Timandm said:

@jhazzroucher said:

All i can say is that it's different when a leader just says "help and do not kill" instead of saying "help and kill when necessary" because the former is encouraging us not to kill while the latter would make us think it's ok to kill for as loing as its necessary. Besides, writers also make mistakes about the character of a character.

@Timandm: it's kinda unfair that you only post scans showing Storm is killing somebody. If i won't be lazy , i can show you more scans of her showing mercy, and when i say more, more examples than what you have.

Interesting...

So, if I was to show video evidence that someone could actually swim... I would consider posting images or videos of them SWIMMING...

But you're suggesting, that I should go further and show videos of them NOT swimming as well?

why would I do that?

Can you please show me where I suggested in any way shape or form that Storm never ever shows mercy?

Can you please show me that? Can you PLEASE tell me how my saying that "Storm only kills when necessary" means she never shows mercy???

there's a difference. If you want to point out something, you have to consider everything. Like what i do why i say Storm is Marvel's #1 superheroine. I research how many appearances did she have i comics, films, cartoons series, video games, etc. Storm not having an ongoing series doesn't mean she doesn't deserve to be Marvel Comics #1 superheroine.

and again, it's not only Storm who says it's not good to kill but she kills. It's not hypocrisy. TB30 already explained.

My dad smokes and drinks but he tells us not to. I know he is not a good model. But it doesn't mean he doesn't deserve to be respected. It doesn't also mean that i don't have to believe him. I know it is for my own good so i did listen to him eventhough he never stopped drinking and smoking.

If i killed somebody, and then i told my friend not to kill doesn't mean i'm a hypocrite. it means I'm showing concern. It also means i could judge that my friend doesn't need to kill, that's why i told him not to.

in a team, if somebody says to kill and everybody follows, then that means it is the best thing to do. But for as long as somebody disagrees, then killing is not necessary.

the goal of the x-men is not to kill and Prof x never told them to kill when necessary. There's a difference when you tell them " not to kill" from "not to kill unless necessary"

and one more thing, writers also make mistakes and how Storm's powers work is one of the best examples. Writers write Storm that she can summon lightning without panting while others write Storm already exhausted just by summoning a lightning. Others write Storm's powers with a slow start-up while we've seen writers writing Storm that she can summon a tornado in a wink of an eye. So which should i believe? which would you believe?

that is my point of view on this matter.

this discussion reminds me of the film "the negotiator". sort of. : )

Posted by Timandm

@SC said:

@Timandm said:

@SC:

So a 30 year old man drinking whisky is a hypocrite for condemning a pregnant 4 year old who is driving a truck... wait... *scratches head*

You know me.... Do you HONESTLY believe that's what I'm saying?

Of course not, but thats what simplicity is, or ignoring context. Like further down on in my post, focusing on the similarities but not the differences. With Storm as well as Cyclops, as well as Wolverine as well as the above intentionally hyper exaggerated example, I make note of as many differences as I can if I think they are relevant eliminating the hypocrisy if required. *smile*

That's not what simplicity is to me....

F = M * A To me, this equation is simple....

Sure, I could make the statement, "A body at rest will remain at rest unless a force acts upon it. Whereas, a body in motion will remain in motion unless a force acts upon it." But I really prefer F = M * A

Those three simple variables represented in that model say the same thing as that statement... In fact, they say more...

Let's try another example...

Let's say, I tell my daughter that she's in trouble... and for her punishment she has to stay in her room for the next one hour.... SIMPLE... Now, does that mean that she should stay there no matter what, come hell or high water? If her room suddenly catches on fire does she have to stay? If her mom calls for her to come downstairs, does that mean my daughter should stay in her room? No... There's a judicious application of common sense...

If I were to try to live in such a way that I couldn't make simple rules like

- Don't lie

- Don't murder

- Don't cheat on your spouse

because all of those rules have obvious exceptions, how could I have ANY rules? Should I try to make all of my rules, or all of my principles that I live by, so specific and so concise that they cover every single situation? To my knowledge, the only language capable of that is MATH and even then it's only with those capable of speaking the language (and I don't really include myself...)..

If I tell my daughters to stay inside, while I go outside to check on something, I'm confident they'll know to come out of the house if it catches on fire... Judicious application of common sense...

Actually, I CAN think of a great example...

"Thou shalt not murder." - Many people are more familiar with the phrasing, "Thou shalt not kill" but this isn't a proper translation.

I LIKE this NICE SIMPLE statement... Don't Murder... Just don't do it...

Someone might want to argue, "What if I'm attacked by a large person with a knife and I have a gun? Can I kill them? And if I do, isn't that murder?"

Well, yes, they could kill them in self defense if necessary, and no it would not be murder. The term murder implies an unlawful or unjustified killing... So, one might THINK the simple statement doesn't work, but it DOES...

Force = Mass x Acceleration ... Some, may think this statement doesn't work because of all those apparent exceptions... A table in a room isn't moving... Yet a force IS indeed acting upon it all all times... So, where is the acceleration? Where is the movement? CLEARLY Force = Mass x Acceleration is WRONG!!!!!!! (not so... There are equal and opposite forces keeping it stationary. )

The fact that some rules APPEAR to have exceptions, and the fact that some rules DO have exceptions, doesn't mean they're wrong..

Posted by Timandm

@jhazzroucher said:

@Timandm said:

@jhazzroucher said:

All i can say is that it's different when a leader just says "help and do not kill" instead of saying "help and kill when necessary" because the former is encouraging us not to kill while the latter would make us think it's ok to kill for as loing as its necessary. Besides, writers also make mistakes about the character of a character.

@Timandm: it's kinda unfair that you only post scans showing Storm is killing somebody. If i won't be lazy , i can show you more scans of her showing mercy, and when i say more, more examples than what you have.

Interesting...

So, if I was to show video evidence that someone could actually swim... I would consider posting images or videos of them SWIMMING...

But you're suggesting, that I should go further and show videos of them NOT swimming as well?

why would I do that?

Can you please show me where I suggested in any way shape or form that Storm never ever shows mercy?

Can you please show me that? Can you PLEASE tell me how my saying that "Storm only kills when necessary" means she never shows mercy???

there's a difference. If you want to point out something, you have to consider everything. Like what i do why i say Storm is Marvel's #1 superheroine. I research how many appearances did she have i comics, films, cartoons series, video games, etc. Storm not having an ongoing series doesn't mean she doesn't deserve to be Marvel Comics #1 superheroine.

and again, it's not only Storm who says it's not good to kill but she kills. It's not hypocrisy. TB30 already explained.

My dad smokes and drinks but he tells us not to. I know he is not a good model. But it doesn't mean he doesn't deserve to be respected. It doesn't also mean that i don't have to believe him. I know it is for my own good so i did listen to him eventhough he never stopped drinking and smoking.

If i killed somebody, and then i told my friend not to kill doesn't mean i'm a hypocrite. it means I'm showing concern. It also means i could judge that my friend doesn't need to kill, that's why i told him not to.

in a team, if somebody says to kill and everybody follows, then that means it is the best thing to do. But for as long as somebody disagrees, then killing is not necessary.

the goal of the x-men is not to kill and Prof x never told them to kill when necessary. There's a difference when you tell them " not to kill" from "not to kill unless necessary"

and one more thing, writers also make mistakes and how Storm's powers work is one of the best examples. Writers write Storm that she can summon lightning without panting while others write Storm already exhausted just by summoning a lightning. Others write Storm's powers with a slow start-up while we've seen writers writing Storm that she can summon a tornado in a wink of an eye. So which should i believe? which would you believe?

that is my point of view on this matter.

this discussion reminds me of the film "the negotiator". sort of. : )

You haven't showed me where I said, "Storm never shows Mercy..."

Edited by jubilee042

@Timandm: man u need to read thunderbolts comment above AGAIN

  • 85 results
  • 1
  • 2