Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
Compared to Hinata, yes Moria is awesome.Still, Luffy with 100 Shadows beat Oars and Moria with like 1000 or something couldn't beat normal Luffy. Moria are weaksauce.
Dude, don't make me go that much off topic here, Moria is awesome, deal with it, he did one-shot Oars Jr. as if he was nothing.
When Moria comes back you'll see the light again.
Originally posted by Damborgson
No Mangekyo for either. Who wins?
We're both rational Itachitards. You know who wins.
There's always LolIzanami, or sending a crow into Kakashi's mouth for an easy victory. kruemelmonsteryn0
Originally posted by socool8520
^ IDK. Itachi's best genjutsus rely on the mengekyo so I don't think he has the upper hand there. No Tsukiyomi, Izanagi, or Izanami. Itachi is faster, but Kakashi has experience with speedsters and his speed difference is not overwhelming. His greatest rival is Gai after all. Without the MS, Itachi loses alot of his advantage over Kakashi. He is basically just a quicker than average fire/water user. Kakashi has mastery over at least 3 elements and is a master of ninjutsu. This fight is really close, but I would give Kakashi the slight edge due to the lack of hax abilities for Itachi.
He hardly needs his best genjutsus for Kakashi. Kakashi's only option for avoiding one of Itachi's genjutsus is to spend the entire fight looking at Itachi's feet (which he cannot do), or use a Shadow clone.
Also, no, Itachi has Izanami. Izanami does not need an MS. Neither does Izanagi. But it's moot, as I doubt he'd use either of the jutsu against Kakashi,
Kakashi's more versatile in the ninjutsu department. Hardly matters though, as Itachi is superior when it comes to analzying his opponent and predicting their next move, close combat, speed, intelligence.
You seem to be forgetting the fact that Kakashi knew he could not beat a sick Itachi with only 30% of his chakra reserves, meaning he did not have MS for that fight.
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel"People live their lives bound by what they accept as correct and true. That's how they define "reality". But what does it mean to be "correct" or "true"? Merely vague concepts… their "reality" may all be a mirage. Can we consider them to simply be living in their own world, shaped by their beliefs?"
Dun exist.