[ SECRET POST #4642 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4642 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 39 secrets from Secret Submission Post #665.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I would have been less bothered by EndgameTony if someone, anyone, told him his "a suit of armor around the world" sounds like Thanos's patronizing bullshit. Like Thanos, Tony thought since he's smarter and more powerful than everybody else he could decide what's best for the hapless plebs who didn't know any better. Instead, he died thinking he was right, and I kinda hate it.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, a suit of armor around the world sounds like a cage.

[(Anonymous)]

This

[(Anonymous)]

+1000

[(Anonymous)]

But would Tony's "suit of armor around the world" actually curtailed anyone's freedoms? And if so, how would it have curtailed people's freedoms?

I definitely agree that if Tony had been able to construct said "suit of armor" he absolutely should not have been the one solely in control of it. No one person, or one government, should've been the one in control of it. But we have no idea what Tony's plans for said suit of armor would've actually entailed. It's clear he wanted one, and it's clear he thought he was probably the person most able to engineer one, but we have no idea what Tony's thoughts about use and regulation were.

And I mean, if you still think it sounds like a bad idea, that's super valid. But if Tony didn't want to be able to curtail people's rights and freedoms with said suit of armor, then his ambitions bear only the most superficial resemblance to Thanos' aspirations.

[(Anonymous)]

The arrogance of it isn't superficial, it's the core of both plans.

Tony thinking that just because he is well-intentioned, everyone will be happy with an incredibly powerful thing he surrounds them with, without considering their concerns or opinions, is arrogant as hell. Also, Tony has had his tech misused multiple times before, it's literally his entire character conflict in IM1, and he should really take that into account by now.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think arrogance is the core of Tony's plan. I think extremely well-founded fear is the core of Tony's plan. That's not to say there isn't a measure of arrogance involved as well, but that it's very much not what's at the core of the idea or of Tony's drive to do it.

Tony thinking that just because he is well-intentioned, everyone will be happy with an incredibly powerful thing he surrounds them with, without considering their concerns or opinions, is arrogant as hell.

I agree that one man taking it upon himself to build a global defense system that could, potentially, theoretically, be used for nefarious means is a problem.

But OTOH, in a world where aliens exist, and have nearly caused an apocalypse in the past, I think being able to protect the world on a global scale is a pretty sound idea. And it makes perfect sense that Tony is pushing for it as a priority.

[(Anonymous)]

How was what he proposed going to be any more effective than what the Avengers were already doing, in terms of protection on a global scale?

Also it's a bit too generous to call it "potential" and "theoretical" when three movies thus far have shown exactly how that tech can go back and zero have shown how it can end well.

[(Anonymous)]

True, we don't know how his suit of armor around the world would function if it existed, but I think the high-handed arrogance behind it is very Thanos-like.

[(Anonymous)]

I associate Thanos with enslavement, destruction, genocide, and sociopathy.

Saying both Tony and Thanos are arrogant and therefore they are alike is likening two things that are only superficially comparable.

[(Anonymous)]

Wasn't Project Insight meant to be exactly that, though? A suit of armor around the world? He worked on it, and it was going to be controlled by a completely trusted agency, not one single person. And it still turned out to be absolutely horrifying even BEFORE we found out HYDRA had a hand in it.

[(Anonymous)]

And there's an example of how something can be a bad idea, or even a good idea that goes very wrong, without the person whose idea it was being bad.

[(Anonymous)]

I think Tony's plan does make him as bad as Thanos, because both their goals have a core of authoritarianism.

[(Anonymous)]

He built repulsor-based propulsion systems for the helicarriers that Project Insight happened to be stationed on, presumably because their previous system had some glaring weaknesses that resulted in him and Steve both nearly getting killed trying to keep one of the things from falling out of the sky. The way his contribution was framed implies he wasn't actually involved in or aware of Project Insight itself.

[(Anonymous)]

And that’s not even considering the whole EDITH mess. I mean. Tony. Wow. What were you thinking.

I sympathize with OP because Tony was one of my favorites up until Ultron, and even after than I couldn’t dislike him just because of what RDJ brought to the character. But I can’t agree with a lot of his decisions; Ultron, the Accords, EDITH..... No, Tony, no.