Were the avengers wrong to kill the supreme intelligence

[mr friendly guy]

In the Avengers vol 1 #347 (Marvel) at the end of a marvel $ making 19 part x-over, certain avengers make the decision to kill the Supreme intelligence

To make a long story short, the Kree are making war with the Shi'ar. Earth naturally gets involve because stargates both races are using to transport ordinance to each others galaxy has a nasty habit of "destabilising our sun".

The Shi'ar win by deploying the "nega bomb", which wipes out >98% of life in the Kree home galaxy by spreading out some weird radiation.

We learn that this was all part of the Supreme Intelligence's convoluted plan to "evolve" the kree. Everyone knows in the Marvelverse if radiation doesn't kill you, you end up with super powers. (Except if you are Doctor Demonicus).

In any event, a debate ensures.

Captain America argues that the Supreme intelligence is "alive", so its automatically wrong to execute him. He also feels its should be dealt with by the Kree survivors.

The vision argues that the Supreme intelligence is artificial, destroying him would be no different than switching off a computer. The vision himself is an artificial being. Also its pretty obvious the Supreme intelligence is clearly sentient.

Iron Man finally leads a group of Avengers who attack the supreme intelligence, and when they get to his "brain", its apparent the supreme intelligence is partially organic. This doesn't stop Iron Man who earliar felt the Intelligence was just a computer.

At the end of the day, Cap decides to quit the Avengers over their action of playing judge, jury and executioner to a mass murderer who freely admitted he commited those crimes and showed no remorse.

So was it wrong for the Avengers to kill the intelligence, in terms of wrong in the act itself, or wrong in interfering with an affair for the Kree survivors?

[Jim Raynor]

It's wrong to kill something that murdered untold billions of people? I don't agree at all with this "real heroes don't kill" crap that's found in so many mainstream superhero comics.

[A Big Flying Fish]

Wrong on neither counts. Sentient or not, it still killed billions, and showed no remorse. Maybe it might have been a bit more interesting if they'd neutralised to the point where the Kree could deal with it, but hell, I'd say killing it before it had the possibility to do it again is more than justifiable.

[Vendetta]

I don't agree at all with this "real heroes don't kill" crap that's found in so many mainstream superhero comics.

It depends on who the superhero is and what scale they operate on.

For example, it's entirely right that Batman won't kill people, because the kind of rogues he deals with can be dealt with by a competent authority. (the bizarre lack of a death penalty, even in special cases, in DCU America is another matter, Joker should have gone to the chair years ago, whether Batman is a killer or not)

[Srynerson]

(the bizarre lack of a death penalty, even in special cases, in DCU America is another matter, Joker should have gone to the chair years ago, whether Batman is a killer or not)

I had understood that most supervillains aren't executed because either they are determined to be mentally incompetent (e.g., the Joker) or conventional execution methods wouldn't kill them anyway (e.g., the Shade) or they have wealth/powerful connections that would prevent their being sentenced to death. That said, at least some states in DCU America certainly have the death penalty as there was a Spectre issue in which Corrigan loses control of the Spectre, who descends on a prison and exercises the wrath of God against many of the inmates, but spares the life of a man on "death row" because he knows the convict is innocent. The rest of the issue deals with the convict's attempt to obtain a pardon based on the theory that his innocence has been proven.

[Superman]

I don't agree at all with this "real heroes don't kill" crap that's found in so many mainstream superhero comics.

It depends on who the superhero is and what scale they operate on.

For example, it's entirely right that Batman won't kill people, because the kind of rogues he deals with can be dealt with by a competent authority. (the bizarre lack of a death penalty, even in special cases, in DCU America is another matter, Joker should have gone to the chair years ago, whether Batman is a killer or not)

Joker is legally insane. You can't kill the insane, that's why he goes to Arkham Asylum instead of some federal prison.

[Xon]

My 2nd hand impression is that Captain America has never been that consistant about he considers "moral".

[Chmee]

My 2nd hand impression is that Captain America has never been that consistant about he considers "moral".

Well, he is Captain America ....

It wouldn't be very credible if everybody in a group the size of the Avengers had an identical philosophical viewpoint about execution.

[DPDarkPrimus]

It's wrong only because it contradicts what occurs in Universe X.

[Vendetta]

Joker is legally insane. You can't kill the insane, that's why he goes to Arkham Asylum instead of some federal prison.

True, however, his history of repeated escapes and mass murder/attempted mass murder would argue that exceptions should be made.

Joker can't be controlled by normal means, he either needs to be executed or lobotomised.

[Srynerson]

Joker can't be controlled by normal means, he either needs to be executed or lobotomised.

(emphasis added)

Why am I sooo picturing that not having the intended consequence? /

[mr friendly guy]

My 2nd hand impression is that Captain America has never been that consistant about he considers "moral".

He sort of changed his views after WWII after being frozen in ice for a few decades. My knowledge may be out of date, but he still subscribes to the "hero shouldn't kill" mentality.

[Jason von Evil]

My 2nd hand impression is that Captain America has never been that consistant about he considers "moral".

Well, he is Captain America ....

It wouldn't be very credible if everybody in a group the size of the Avengers had an identical philosophical viewpoint about execution.

Fuck you. His belief system and morals are rooted in the original ideals of America, not the beliefs of whoever is in the White House. The comic and Marvel have gotten heat for being critical of Bush and his policies.

If the Supreme Intelligence had been put on trial (a formal one), found guilty and sentenced to death, then he would have had no problem. He feared what effect this unilateral action would have on the team. Would they use lethal force on all villains? Petty criminals? World leaders?

[Cal Wright]

Don't forget SI started a war, that very well could have destroyed Earth and all life on it. Both sides are right, but Cap quiting was uncalled for. One, you can bring him in to stand trial that way or have the team go and off him. It could really work both ways.