Originally posted by CosmicComet
😂 😂 😂Lol. 'murderous weapons' A blundgeon is not the same as a damn axe edge, so no don't attempt to cast this wide categorical net and count mjolnir strikes equally with jarnjborn.
Yeah, I'm sure Thor used advanced Asgardian maths to make sure he used the precise amount of force to produce exactly zero penetration against Hulk's skin. A baby wielding a knife could cut you accidentally with zero effort behind it, but I'm sure Thor's double handed full leverage swings from his 600 lb, high class 100 body were used with exactly no intent to harm Hulk whatsoever.
Yeah, that makes total sense.
As opposed to holding back the normal way by not using a murderous instrument at all, Thor decided to make holding back as difficult as possible on himself.
"I know I'll never be able to kill him with my fists, but I'll just use my axe and instead and still hold back. Yeah, that's right, I'll hold back while making it as difficult as possible to hold back by using a murderous weapon that might actually kill him if I accidentally chop his head off. It's a holding back self challenge!"
Your point is absolutely retarded. It's infuriating when perfectly normal people choose to be willfully retarded.
Thor admitted to being open to kill Cho despite how sad he'd be because he admitted there may not be another choice as weakening him was not working.
Cho was weakened, and truly the one holding back, as he wanted to talk Thor out of fighting him. And he won, easily. Without a damn mark on him.
A weakened, holding back Cho two pieced a Thor willing to kill who was using a murderous cosmic level weapon to attempt just that.
What a post. Papa Stilt is proud of you!
Keep raping those thorbags, never show any mercy 👆
Originally posted by CosmicComet
😂 😂 😂Lol. 'murderous weapons' A blundgeon is not the same as a damn axe edge, so no don't attempt to cast this wide categorical net and count mjolnir strikes equally with jarnjborn.
Yeah, I'm sure Thor used advanced Asgardian maths to make sure he used the precise amount of force to produce exactly zero penetration against Hulk's skin. A baby wielding a knife could cut you accidentally with zero effort behind it, but I'm sure Thor's double handed full leverage swings from his 600 lb, high class 100 body were used with exactly no intent to harm Hulk whatsoever.
Yeah, that makes total sense.
As opposed to holding back the normal way by not using a murderous instrument at all, Thor decided to make holding back as difficult as possible on himself.
"I know I'll never be able to kill him with my fists, but I'll just use my axe and instead and still hold back. Yeah, that's right, I'll hold back while making it as difficult as possible to hold back by using a murderous weapon that might actually kill him if I accidentally chop his head off. It's a holding back self challenge!"
Your point is absolutely retarded. It's infuriating when perfectly normal people choose to be willfully retarded.
Thor admitted to being open to kill Cho despite how sad he'd be because he admitted there may not be another choice as weakening him was not working.
Cho was weakened, and truly the one holding back, as he wanted to talk Thor out of fighting him. And he won, easily. Without a damn mark on him.
A weakened, holding back Cho two pieced a Thor willing to kill who was using a murderous cosmic level weapon to attempt just that.
Look. Chulk looked gud. That's fine. All well and good. But to go further and make it seem like he stopped a bloodlusted Odinson is not only dumb, but shows that u refuse to even read the material. The fight was cut short ffs. You're literally ignoring the part where he came in knowing T'Challa and Jim were planning on plugging him with de-hulking weapons. Do you have blinders on or something?
So an implication without an explicit statement takes precendence over Thor saying "Me wants kills yous. Me wants to give you no head"?
It could easily be argued that Thor attempted to defang him and the rest of the dudes were backup incase his didn't cut his face off.
Not to mention that only accounts for offense anyway. It's not like he was banking durability in his caboose waiting for a rainy day. "I'm going against a Hulk who gets stronger as he gets madder and he has asian rage? I'll probably save some durability... maybe if he became a Muslim would I need to withdrawal all my durability!"
And holding his hot bod like that isn't a great indicator. Even if you argue flash KO, Thor didn't exactly leap back in there right away.
At worst he lost in two hits. At best he got embarressed in two hits.
Originally posted by One Big Mob
So an implication without an explicit statement takes precendence over Thor saying "Me wants kills yous. Me wants to give you no head"?
Originally posted by One Big Mob
It could easily be argued that Thor attempted to defang him and the rest of the dudes were backup incase his didn't cut his face off.Not to mention that only accounts for offense anyway. It's not like he was banking durability in his caboose waiting for a rainy day. "I'm going against a Hulk who gets stronger as he gets madder and he has asian rage? I'll probably save some durability... maybe if he became a Muslim would I need to withdrawal all my durability!"
And holding his hot bod like that isn't a great indicator. Even if you argue flash KO, Thor didn't exactly leap back in there right away.
At worst he lost in two hits. At best he got embarressed in two hits.
At worst Chulk looked very impressive and had the upper hand against a named opponent. At best it was all part of a ploy to depower Chulk so they can avoid actually having to kill him.
Originally posted by celeyhyga17And if you look at the scene Thor was hacking at his ****ing head with a lightning charged axe. That is exactly the sort of thing you do not do when you're holding back and not trying to kill someone.
If u take the whole story with the issues leading up to this, yes.. Odinson was willing to give his life so Cho can live during Sakaar. He was urging Cho to kill him before he completely loses his battle against the obedience disk.
Here he is threatening Cho with bluster. Also he didn't actually say he will kill him, he said IF you continue acting dumb yadda, yadda, yadda, he would "kill" him.. Other than Banner or Herc, One can say Odinson is one of the few heroes Amadeus has bonded with based on past showings. They treat him like a ward. Odinson would try his darndest not to hurt let alone kill this kid.True. He could have been trying to defang him.. Hence it was a gud showing for Chulk.
At worst Chulk looked very impressive and had the upper hand against a named opponent. At best it was all part of a ploy to depower Chulk so they can avoid actually having to kill him.
*puts arms behind back, looks down and kicks dirt*
Also that "if" argument doesn't work when he immediately rushes at Pak in a rage and the "if" part also works for assuming that's all he is now. It'd be like if you went over to Carver's house and he was in there killing and eating children. He looks at you and goes "Oi, you want some of this you bloody kunt? I've still got two shitters left mate, grab a nappy luv." and you tell him if this is all he does now, you're going to carve his heart out. You're not giving him a chance to eat more children, you're saying "if this is what you are now".
That's a pretty far stretch imo. If Thor could have subdued him on his own he would have. Especially when you're speaking of Pak who has a thing for Hulks and shitting on others. I doubt if you asked Pak his intentions he would have said anything but ChinaHulk being tops.
We will see next issue of course, but I doubt he's going to do anything to change that scene.
He hasn't done anything to warrant being killed. He just literally started declaring that he would take justice into his own hands. He hasn't gone around beating the shiet out of countless heroes or causing planetwide destruction.
Just because Odinson has a bladed weapon doesn't mean it always ends in death or something close to it. Diana has sliced Superman in the belly during DS war and she wasn't trying to kill him. There's even sacrifice where she slits his throat and still she wasn't trying to kill him.
I don't buy even once that Odinson was in "rage". That's bluster 101 and made even more obvious when he was waxing poetic and going on about killing trolls, giants, and the like.
He's already hit him with the axe a few issues back. It's not set in stone when bladed weapons are used that it means going for the kill... Especially in this medium. It's like saying that all heroes who use bladed weapons are going for the kill.
Yet Thor seems to think so. Whatever he did doesn't really matter to the context of the quote. He used it exactly like what I explained. He didn't give him a chance to defend himself, he just assumed and answered his own question. Here's another very real world example:
Carver's mom catches him beating off to a gay porno. Let's call it The Bearcave. She says "If all yous is goinsta do nows is diddle your widdle piddle mister to hairy men licking chest hair then Imma beat the stuffin outta you boy." And then she grabs a switch and goes to town. This is what you are, this is what you've done, this is what's going to happen. Carver might not be even gay, he just might have a heat of the moment weakness to Bearcave Boys, but all his mom knows is that she has to beat the gay out of him. She didn't give him a chance to look at more of the gay action, she punished him for what he had done. That is how "if" was used.
They've seen a Huc rage before and they needed to stop him.
That is a point, yes. The problem however is that Thor outright said he wasn't holding back, said he was going to kill him, and then lightning charged his axe. A chain of events that led to him hitting him in the head. It's not comparable to other scenes that may or may not have said the character wasn't trying to kill him.
I haven't bought a lot of things that I wish I had bought. Even normal items that just rocket up in price. It doesn't make me correct, it just means I haven't bought it. Just like I'm not buying you not buying this.
I don't buy the explanation that all of the explicit statements and actions are actually incorrect because of an implication. It's not even like he winked at the camera either, he just knew he had backup. If this doesn't get touched on at all next issue, there is no way I as sure as my name begins with a B will accept this answer. There's a difference between not liking something and just not accepting it and making up your own context.
Yes he said he will kill him if he continues acting like a douchebag and yes he said he won't be holding back.
That is if u actually believe he was going to really hurt/kill him right then and there.
I don't buy it based on previous issues and what happened on panel at the end of the comic. I'd be more inclined to agree if they had not have Odinson say he was "not alone" and other pieces that seem to fit the puzzle. Talking too much, Chulk saying Odinson would never kill Cho, Cho saying Chulk was not using his brain and getting "distracted", etc..
Btw in regards to Odinson not giving him "chance" to talk, that's distraction... Bellow and bluster until your team gets a great opening.
And since u and another poster has brought up about hacking at someone's head with a cosmic axe as proof of "willing to kill"...
That's Herc and he was none worse for the wear after their little scuffle. Cosmic axe to the Dome don't mean a darn thing when there's context involved.
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-x1o28kGSqOA/WUFAgU3dlwI/AAAAAAAEF0I/16EfiZuKZ241zT2TYNjNV5cBTw38nuAKQCLcBGAs/s1600/031_016.jpg
I wonder if Thor was holding back here when he said "and now you die".
https://comicnewbies.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/thor-vs-nul-and-angrir-5.jpg
This version of Hulk didn't go around killing heros, etc... I'm guessing Thor was holding back here as well? When he said "and now you die", I'm guessing that meant "and now you live".
Originally posted by celeyhyga17I've already used two examples to show how if can and was used in a different way than allowing more to happen. Let's use another example to show mistaken motives:
Yes he said he will kill him if he continues acting like a douchebag and yes he said he won't be holding back.
That is if u actually believe he was going to really hurt/kill him right then and there.
I don't buy it based on previous issues and what happened on panel at the end of the comic. I'd be more inclined to agree if they had not have Odinson say he was "not alone" and other pieces that seem to fit the puzzle. Talking too much, Chulk saying Odinson would never kill Cho, Cho saying Chulk was not using his brain and getting "distracted", etc..Btw in regards to Odinson not giving him "chance" to talk, that's distraction... Bellow and bluster until your team gets a great opening.
And since u and another poster has brought up about hacking at someone's head with a cosmic axe as proof of "willing to kill"...
That's Herc and he was none worse for the wear after their little scuffle. Cosmic axe to the Dome don't mean a darn thing when there's context involved.
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-x1o28kGSqOA/WUFAgU3dlwI/AAAAAAAEF0I/16EfiZuKZ241zT2TYNjNV5cBTw38nuAKQCLcBGAs/s1600/031_016.jpg
Carver is in the laundry room looking for a clean pair of pants. His bag of weed falls out into a clean pair of his mom's panties. Carver then starts smelling the panties to make sure they don't smell like weed. His mom walks in. At this stage it doesn't matter what he says, she has caught him red handed. Carver's motives weren't to get a euphoric reaction from the sniff, but rather he was doing investigative sniffs to rule out a possible switch beating. He was sniffing panties for his own protection.
Cho was caught sniffing panties and he needed to be dealt with. If all he is is a panty sniffer, then he needs to be treated like one.
Like I said, if doesn't mean you're allowing for further indecencies to occur. It can, has, will, and was used to assume the current motives for that character. Cho was a silly billy who needed to be stopped. It wasn't "If you so much as destroy one more piece of pavement I'm going to step on your toes" it was "If this is what you intend to do, I'm going to **** your face".
Now you said something earlier about him not warranting getting killed, but the fact is they were doing everything they could to put him down, so obviously it warranted him being stopped. And if the only way to stop him was to kill him, then so be it. You're talking about the guy who killed his grandfather afterall because he had some enchantments on him.
Not to mention Thor stopped talking once he threatened to kill him. All you heard was his pissed off screams.
And the backup is really meaningless. He knew he had that in his back pocket so he could do whatever he wanted. You'd be more inclined to punch Satan in the dick if you had your Thorboys behind you than if you were alone. It's pretty much "I failed on my own, go get him boys!"
I just explained the difference. He wasn't threatening to kill Herc while speaking of not holding back and imbuing his strikes with lightning. There is a clear difference in comics between those two intents. Not to mention this line of logic allows you to rubber band Thor wherever you want. You get to pick and choose where he was holding back. Guy probably could have killed Mangog but he was holding back.
You're telling me that he was holding back while outright saying he wasn't, that he was going to kill him, that he was lightning charging his axe and he was going for headshots? Like a great Carver once said:
"What more could Thor have done to show he wasn't holding back?"
Like really. You want to claim it was a low showing, be my guest. No issue there. But don't shut your bumhole and deny penis advances when you got naked in the first place.
What you're relying on is a very very vague "implication" to try and outrule statements, intent, and just things happening. Secret motives don't override stated motives when we have nothing to go on.
Next issue it might very well prove you correct. I'm not a fortune teller, I can't rule that out. But right now it's very clear what Pak intended to portray here. He even had him say it in two different... 3 different ways, to show it was full Thor. The artist even went along with it. He even harkened back to the Sakar fight to try and silence the dissenters, much like he did in the "But he hasn't broken a world dawg" from HoTM. Because Pak hates when people mistake his intentions. If Pak doesn't cover this in the next issue, I guarantee he will write a little snide line in the future.
You're not talking about some subtle king of writing. Pak ****ing loves Hulks. Hulk is the best, and everything he writes is out to show it.
Originally posted by celeyhyga17
Lol.
That hulk was trying to kill heroes. He was also causing massive destruction iirc..That's a Thor on his last legs trying to prevent the destruction of earth.
That's not remotely close to this.
What heros did Thor witness him trying to kill?
And he still did everything he could to defend himself and stop the Hulk. I dont get what you are implying here. If Thor could've defeated Cho and stop all that Cho is doing, why not do it? If Supergirl was on a rampage, would Diana need assistance stopping her?
