Yangchen was completely right. Refusing to do what's best for the greater good because it conflicts with your own personal and completely subjective sense of morality is unbelievably selfish. This is what makes heroes like Batman a total joke. Killing evil people benefits everyone. Who gives a frick if it makes you feel bad.
this message is frank approved
>Refusing to what's best for the greater good
>Sacrificing millions to save billions
Yeah, these two would approve.
Hell yeah, dudes
>fatetrannoid
kys
So let someone else do it for you. Keep yourself away from the temptation, but don't let someone else get in the way of doing what you know needs to be done but which you admit you are too WEAK to do yourself.
I'm in basic agreement with this sentiment, but calling it "WEAK" is a bit of a stretch. It does take strength to adhere to one's convictions under pressure, even if they're inappropriate for the situation.
Except thats not what is happening in the picture he replied to.
Lets replace 'killing the joker' with 'drinking a beer'.
Batman is saying he wants to drink a beer more than anything, but he won't let himself because he knows that if he takes even one sip he will become an alcoholic.
Thats not conviction, he isn't saying he shouldn't do this for moral reasons or that he refuses to do it because he finds it distasteful. He says he can't allow himself to do it because once he starts he knows he is too weak to stop himself from doing ti again and again. He lacks the self control to moderate himself, so total abstinance is his only options.
While its admirable to have the self awareness of that, its still a recognition of his own weakness.
That's a damned fair point, anon. I was thinking more in terms of his no-kill rule in general, so I hadn't looked at it that way.
Why doesn't Batman ever try doing that skit from Robot Chicken - advocating in court that the Joker should receive the Death Penalty? Yeah the Defense can say he's mentally insane, but given his constant repeat offenses over years and years and years, they should know that he's still aware of what he's doing and is a menace to society.
Because DC universe's legal system is a joke and you get away with basically anything so long as you wear funny outfit while doing so and claim being a nutso?
the latest iteration of BATMAN, is ADAM WEST AS BATMAN, with the rosy effects ripped off EVERYTHING HIM AND THE BOY WONDER DID in that classic television show, that running down the street into the ocean with that bomb scene?
Now it shows him, wearing that same iconic suit, running in the early morning GLOOM, with a bloody bomb, with DEAD PUPPIES(no puppies harmed in the making of this movie) wired up to it and running down a vastly darker and heartbreaking street. Getting grittier, darker, and more messed up, til Batman saves the day throwing it into a pile of baby eating, crack addicted seals kept by a local trafficking gang.
All while Adam WEST is crying tears and saying his lines, with a broken mans smile on his face.
Or don't be a pussy and just kill once.
Why are media always acting like 1 murder will turn you into a dark psychopath who will then kill for jaywalking and stuff?
I don't know. Myself and plenty of others have killed in the line of duty and have come back home to live a normal life.
Not everyone experiences war the same.
Was Cap America ever shown with ptsd cause he needed to kill nazis?
Ultimate cap was. And he was no less of a hero because of it.
I assume masked vigilantes are just barely tolerated by law enforcement. Allowing them to just kill criminals would be over the line.
You're right, but it's a kid's cartoon and you can't teach kids that you gotta kill some people sometimes. Avatar is a good kid show, but it's still a kid show, and stuff like this is a good reminder for grown men who think it's some complex adult masterpiece
As
said (but less intense), let someone else kill him. Bunch of other anti-heroes have almost killed the Joker and he could have just chosen to let them do it. He would be accomplice to murder, but he's already that by letting his rouge's gallery live. Him saving the Joker over and over makes him responsible for the massive death count he makes, so he might as well just let some edgelord cut his throat and move on.
>and you can't teach kids that you gotta kill some people sometimes
That was literally the multiple-times-stated lesson of that episode.
This, Batman doesn't kill because he knows he's insane and once he pops the fun wont stop.
Now, the real question is in a city with as many dirty cops as Gotham, why doesn't one of them just kill Joker while in custody?
Batman puts him in the back of a squad car, and when the car arrives at the station Joker is in the back, mysteriously shot in the face.
Bruce if killing one person would make you a killing machine that simply won't stop then you're just a tickling bomb.
You're not fit to be a hero.
>then you're just a tickling bomb.
>You're not fit to be a hero.
Most versions of Batman would agree with this.
I think the problem is the no killing thing makes more sense in a more realistic world where people aren't evil for sake of providing a villain for the plot, and where there aren't superhumans who can spray fire everywhere or escape from prison hundreds of times.
Underrated post. Comics have traditionally provided an idealistic way of looking at the world /ourselves, but this has a tendency to be fundamentally incompatible with the world (s) that these characters actually inhabit.
it's that asian way of thinking where YOU must conform to what society wants and if you're conflicted that's just a sign you're morally bad
it is your own subjective sense of morality telling you that killing ozai is good you hypocrite
Saving the entire world is not "subjectively moral" you leftist imbecile. I hope some Black person you let out of jail sticks a gun in your face and pulls the trigger.
>Kill Ozai
>Ozai loyalists make him a matyr
>Make sure that some of the Fire Nation nobles see themselves better than Ozai, or Distant themselves from Ozai
>That's good, there's a divide between Loyalist Ozais and some Independent Fire nation nobles.
>Balkanize the Fire Nation so the Fire nation can go at each other throats as reparation thereby crippling them.
>Some Balkanized Fire Nation countries will have strong relations with other nations
>While those that don't, are antagonized (They're mostly loyalist to Ozais)
>Fire Nation never becomes a threat again, and the victims are appeased.
There fixed it, Balkanization solves everything For the winners[/spoilers]
You didn't fix anything lol? You just created more problems and wars. Even side stepping your Pro-Civil War idea, this would most likely just take longer than what shown in the show. The idea was to "unite" the nations for an era of peace and harmony. While I do like your idea (first time I'm seeing picrel), it would just start a long line of problems, like how would the other nations or notable figures react?
Aight. I started that pic as meme, but seeing it now. Here's how a Balkanized Fire nation goes.
You'll never escape Ozai's and the War's legacy, and certainly there are going to be some loyalist to Ozai. There's thing, you need to create a narrative, a blame game. You Balkanize the fire Nation to give some Fire Nation nobles to take advantage of it, making it an ideologue divide between the War legacy and the future. Think of the American Civil War, where the newly formed Balkanized Fire countries would either be either Pro-Ozai or not.
Now Balkanization leads to Civil wars, of course the one who balkanized this shit expects it. So you (mostly the other nations) support the Non-Ozai fire nation countries to hell, making them wage their civil war to route out all the Ozai loyalists. It's better if the Fire nation people are doing this instead of a foreign power. Then bam, reconstruction, and eventual reunification.
The other nation leaders would see the Balkanization and Civil Wars as a good enough appeasement for the war they waged. And some Fire Nation countries would have better relations with the nations, while others don't. And by the time unification comes, the blood spilled by the various Fire Nation civil wars would be enough for them to say they repaid for everything.
Zuko's reaction is pretty much confusion at first, plus anger considering Civil wars
Azula is all too furious, and would gladly join in a civil war to reunite the fire nation
The other nation leaders, mostly the ones heavily affected the war, would see the balkanization as appeasement.
The White Lotus would fricking oppose of this, try their best to prevent further civil wars.
Aang would have a new job to harmonize the Fire Nation Balkanization.
I just like the idea of a Balkanized Fire nation
>I started that pic as meme
Oh then it was was very well done IMO
>You'll never escape Ozai's and the War's legacy, and certainly there are going to be some loyalist to Ozai
Well the idea isn't to escape Ozai or the Legacy but to grow and change from it. "We" can't change or take back the damage from the 100 Year War but can move forward and do better. Yeah I expect there to be some loyalist to Ozai even after his defeat and loss of bending
>You Balkanize the fire Nation to give some Fire Nation nobles to take advantage of it, making it an ideologue divide between the War legacy and the future. Think of the American Civil War, where the newly formed Balkanized Fire countries would either be either Pro-Ozai or not.
Would this really be necessary? I mean, can you think of any other ways to represent or show change to the natives and others from their respective Nations?
>Now Balkanization leads to Civil wars, of course the one who balkanized this shit expects it. So you (mostly the other nations) support the Non-Ozai fire nation countries to hell, making them wage their civil war to route out all the Ozai loyalists. It's better if the Fire nation people are doing this instead of a foreign power. Then bam, reconstruction, and eventual reunification.
I like the idea as a concept.
>The other nation leaders would see the Balkanization and Civil Wars as a good enough appeasement for the war they waged. And some Fire Nation countries would have better relations with the nations, while others don't. And by the time unification comes, the blood spilled by the various Fire Nation civil wars would be enough for them to say they repaid for everything.
Wouldn't this go against the theme of forgiving and moving on in hopes of a better "something"? Seems weird that Water Nation would agree or support this civil war as justice for what was done to their people. This would just create a back and forth (especially with the way LOK went down esp. w/ Amon)
(cont.)
>The other nation leaders would see the Balkanization and Civil Wars as a good enough appeasement for the war they waged. And some Fire Nation countries would have better relations with the nations, while others don't. And by the time unification comes, the blood spilled by the various Fire Nation civil wars would be enough for them to say they repaid for everything.
The idea to repay for your past crimes through blood is noble, but nothing good would come from it though. Especially if you're going to use the American CW, when America successfully became its own thing, it was a very fragile thing. Which is important because during times like Shays Rebellion where GB would hope for its downfall and come back to reclaim what was theirs.
>Zuko
Given his journey, he would be angered and upset by Aang decision to kill his dad and the chaos it would ensue
>Azula
She's already gone and is a schizo unironically
>Other Nation Leaders
Bumi wouldn't, hell he was expecting the opposite to happen. I'm not sure who the leaders are for the Water Tribes (Unless Pakku is the northern one) but I don't see how they would support or enjoy it either? They known what war does to people and they've moved on enough to the point of strengthening their own people as a proud nation, plus two of the major avatars are from the Water Tribes, so it's really not in their best interest tbh
>TWL
We agree
>Aang
This seems like more work for Aang, but interesting enough this would actually make more sense with the way LOK decides to ruin his character. It makes sense that Aang would neglect his kids or focus on rebuilding their Air Nation if he went down this road.
>I just like the idea of a Balkanized Fire nation
I really like yours. This checks the box for everything I want for the most part, but if we're going by how effective it would be, this would be 2nd or 3rd. It's not really because it's inherently bad, just different.
So are you saying that Aang was wrong? If Aang killed Ozai that wouldn't really help, you'd just be unironically following Ozai's steps in taking power by any means necessary. There would just be more war, ruined relationships between the nations, etc...
This is why I think and admire what Aang does in the show. Ultimately, Aang along with Team Avatar strengthens the societies of each nation in one way or another to the point where things would be left in better hands.
>There would just be more war, ruined relationships between the nations, etc...
And how did sparing Ozai directly prevent any of that? Surely the risk of such a thing can only be dramatically HIGHER if the fire national loyalists can cling to the dream of setting free their capture fire lord and going back to the good old days. The fire nation was not terrifyingly stronger under Ozai because he personally showed up to fights and wiped the floor with the enemy, Ozai was an effective military leader and ruler. Energy bending to remove his fire powers don't diminish any of what makes Ozai actually dangerous, if anything it creates an opportunity for effective propaganda: look what they have stolen from me, destroy them before they take it from you as well!
>And how did sparing Ozai directly prevent any of that?
It's important to acknowledged how Ozai was "spared" first of all. Though this just brings me back to what I said about Aang/Team Avatar strengthening the societies to be left in better hands. If Ozai was killed, Zuko would most likely have his "inherent right" be stripped away seeing how he colluded with others to basically have his father assassinated. The Fire Nation would be go through a civil war (and this is just wishfully thinking) for who knows how long with the other nations looking.
>Energy bending to remove his fire powers don't diminish any of what makes Ozai actually dangerous, if anything it creates an opportunity for effective propaganda: look what they have stolen from me, destroy them before they take it from you as well!
The main thing about Ozai was his high ability of fire bending. It's clear that during the Fire Nation's era for Ozai and/or Uncle Iroh, your ability as a fighter translated into power, status, etc... prime example would be Agni Kais.
The likelihood of there being propaganda from the Ex-Fire Lord and it working would be unlikely, seeing how Zuko becomes the Fire Lord and moves the Nation into a better place/space, which just comes into how the Aang/Team Avatar strengthen the societies. It's clear that there were high powered Fire Nation citizens (the elders, Piandao, Iroh, Jeong Jeong, etc...) that were willing and waiting for the right time to come out and restore things.
Plus who's going to fight/challenge Zuko? Who also has the support of Avatar, well known members from each other Nation, and most likely the nation themselves due to all the good relation building Team Avatar has done
Now I'm imagining Ty Lee dirty and shell shocked in a trench line holding to her rifle with mile long stare as a whistle call for going over the top again for the 8th time today.
And taking away his bending and locking him in a prison cell with moldy bread and water is so much better?
Why do people always bring Batman like if he is the only superhero with a no-kill rule? No one asks why Spiderman doesn't kill Carnage.
In most cases where the hero doesn't kill the villain, its is because either the villain's crimes were not that heinous or the hero isn't in a position to actually kill the villain, just defeat them for a time. Actually *killing* Carnage is much, much harder than just beating him badly enough that he slinks away to lick his wounds, and Spiderman is usually so exhausted just doing THAT much that chasing after Carnage to continue the fight would probably just get Peter killed. Much in the same way that Superman can punch Darkseid a bunch, but killing him is (usually) outside of his power.
Neither of those cases are true with Batman. Joker has killed a million people. Locking him up doesn't work, he will just escape again and kill a million more. Bruce KNOWS this, and killing the Joker is something that is well within his power like twice a month. It doesn't even have to be an execution, he could just kill him in one of their weekly fights to the death and no one would even raise an eyebrow over it. Frankly, its more surprisingly that it hasn't happened already just by accident.
>Locking him up doesn't work, he will just escape again and kill a million more.
The problem has never been that Batman won't kill the Joker. It's that almost every court in Gotham is corrupt or incompetent so they always send him to Arkham, the place that infamously has multiple escapees every week.
>seething about Batman for no reason
Boy DC really does live rent free in this board's collective head.
>Person with power can choose who lives or dies
>People get mad when you decide not to kill
This is why it’s given to one person instead of everyone
Energybendig was an asspull.
>If Aang killed Ozai that wouldn't really help, you'd just be unironically following Ozai's steps in taking power by any means necessary.
Yeah that would be the case if Ozai and the fire nation wasnt cartoonishly evil. The morality of this show is straight up black and white.
Frick off, Snyder.
Aren't there Ozai loyalists in the comics set after the ATLA finale? Never read them, but how does Aang deal with those who drank the Ozai Kool-Aid?
>Refusing to do what's best for the greater good because it conflicts with your own personal and completely subjective sense of morality
Determining what constitutes "the greater good" depends on the moral calculus to be used. Which is a subjective value judgement, like all other value judgements. Sure, there is value to be had in having fewer violent criminals running around, but there is also value in not having the general public subject to vigilante executions. Which is more important is not something that can be decided by "objective" means, even in principle.
Honestly, keeping Ozai alive after de-bending wasn't the issue. The main issue was The Gaang not taking Azula's bending as well as allowing Zuko's selfish desire to find Ursa to give Azula the means to escape and become the biggest threat to balance. That and Zuko being so ineffectual that he not only allows Mai to commit treason while doing nothing about it but also allows a seditious group to grow to the point that if Azula didn't sabotage them, they would have a caused a civil war.
>even when you're strong you're weak
what is this garbage writing
This is true but avatar is a kids show and you cant make a kids show with messages like killing your enemies is good unless you are from North Korea (see hedgehog and squirrel)
It’s fine to be a hero with a code against killing, because you wouldn’t have killed the villain if you didn’t become a hero either. It’s still a net good.
When you kill a mass murderer, the number of mass murderers stays the same!
If a space alien came and announced that due to being a potential future threat, complete human extinction right now was necessary for the greater good of intergalactic civilisations, would you comply?
If Aang wasn’t literally the last Airbender I think it would have been different from him. All he really has left of them is his living memory, and all the world has left of the Air Nomads is ruins, some scrolls, and Aang. Were there still Air Nomads besides him, people still living that culture the sacrifice of his ideals for the greater good wouldn’t have been as hard a choice that needed a dues-ex-machina to solve.