Would it be right for Superman to overthrow dictators?

Would it be right for Superman to overthrow dictators?

Only if he can replace said dictator with a person and government that he can guarantee are not corrupt and will look out for the people's interest. Otherwise, he's just leaving a power vacuum for some other dictator to fill.

In other words, no.

Back in silver age, wasn't supes "obliged" to follow the law ?

Back in the day, a little comic called "The Authority" answered this question...
Turns out that sort of thing opens up a whole can of Cred Forums worms.
It wouldn't end well for Supes either.

This is the issue. Superman simply isn't willing to execute people on the sheer scale necessary to replace a corrupt dictatorship with a non-corrupt democracy that isn't going to be overthrown in a month by another corrupt dictatorship.

That shit takes years, massive effort by an entire nation that has to be willing to change, you have to deal with great numbers of war-criminal militia members/military officers, and putting them all in their prisons is just asking for them to broken out and form a guerilla underground...

No, if he doesn't do the same to Obama or an American president he is an hypocrite. He can intervene in humanitarian crisis as long as he doesn't line up with nato or Israel plans

That's the point, either put the entire world in a bottle or don't do anything. The we are the good guys and they are the bad guys is offensive propaganda

No, because you can't solve the problem by just nabbing the bad guy and calling it a day. It takes years of planning and change, which Superman would have to personally oversee. On top of that, Superman would have to essentially play king and determine who should rule.

Fugg red son was really good.

>if he doesn't do the same to Obama or an American president he is an hypocrite
Why?
The American president does very little to harm his own people.

So it's okay if it is other country's people?

>guns firing with safeties on

Not even a /k/fag, but goddammit, artists, detail.

Red Son was so fucking good.

More or less.
A nation's first responsibility is its own citizens.
So long as it does that, it's good.

What it does to other nations is a case by case judgement.
In the modern case, I don't think anyone can argue that the only violent intervention by the United States (i.e. ISIS) is wrong.

One could argue that Obama giving weapons to Islamic militants to overthrow a democratically elected leader is wrong. Especially when those fighters team up and share resources with ISIS and the USA doesn't stop sending supplies.

If you think Assad was democratically elected, then you've go to have more skepticism.

Better than funding rebels and hoping they figure it out. I thought we had learned that by now but I suppose not.

Side note, why is the U.S. so goddamn afraid of just declaring war on a country to remove leadership?

Take your shit back to Cred Forums.
I'm not reporting -these- posts, but they are rule violations so cut it the fuck out.

>Side note, why is the U.S. so goddamn afraid of just declaring war on a country to remove leadership?

Pausible deniability. It looks terrible on the eyes of the international community to outright ignore international law.

>only violent intervention by the United States (i.e. ISIS) is wrong.
>only violent

Superman is a protector, not a ruler or controller. If you shoot a gun at someone, he will stop the bullet and put you in jail. What he wI'll never do is invade Congress and forcefully change laws to suit his desires.

What if Superman just kills everyone who would ever dream of becoming a dictator?
What if we just limit it to those who dream it and have the means to make it real? Is it okay then?

Where else in the world do we have boots on the ground?

This isn't Cred Forums talk, man.
We're talking about whether Superman should intervene in world affairs.
That must necessarily have discussions of world affairs.

Would you rather just replace all mentions of Syria with one of those many fake middle eastern nations that DC uses?

>If you shoot a gun at someone, he will stop the bullet and put you in jail
What if that someone is trying to rape a little child and I'm an average joe that just happened to find his gun in a desserted area?

What if Superman ruled the world?

>Better than funding rebels and hoping they figure it out.
Not really.
Funding rebels against Assad was right.
He was not a fair and just ruler.

What they do after is their choice.
If they turn into poor rulers, then fund the people who oppose them.

If you believe funding rebels is always wrong, do you think that funding the Maquis was wrong too?

Superman would stop you from shooting the pedo and put you both in jail. You aren't above the law, user.

Why are DC/Marvel so afraid of using actual countries? Just say it's Iraq or some other awful sand country instead of making up Qurac and its like.

Probably so some immigrant parents don't sue them for indoctrinating their children with propaganda or something.

Comics are viewed as for children and so they're open to attack by "Kids can't tell fiction from reality".

>What they do after is their choice.
If it's their choice after then it is their choice before too.
Your foreign policies are just wrong. Just stay out of everywhere, please.

>their choice before too.
You mean like forming a rebellion?

Funding rebels is different than creating them

>Funding rebels against Assad was right.
>If they turn into poor rulers, then fund the people who oppose them.
So basically, you want to keep causing wars until you run out of money.

Most recently North Korea had hackers attack Sony Pictures because they didn't like a Seth Rogan movie.
International incidents caused by entertainment media is not that uncommon.
Creating Latveria means that you can openly ridicule Eastern European states with old nukes laying around.
Writing about an island-nation called Genosha lets you point out how cruel South Africa's apartheid was.
Marvel does political commentary more than DC but I know there's a few DC examples too.
It's easier to avoid Cred Forums by staying on your board.

People being shitty is causing wars by having their people organize against them in a meaningful way.

Enabling people to do something against that is good, for the most part.

If the rebels were totally great guys you might have a leg to stand on. They aren't. They're a bunch of Islamist warlords. Assad wasn't an angel but he's better than what came after him.

Before the strike I mean.
Letting them on their own after that is obviously flawed. But obviously nobody cares because all those dead will be so far away that they won't bother our perfect scenery.

You're really keeping it on topic, guys.

Vague talk.

>Most recently North Korea had hackers attack Sony Pictures because they didn't like a Seth Rogan movie.
Was that not just a publicity stunt by Sony?

>people need to ask

I think we all knew this was how it had to end.

>directdemocratic elections can be trusted

Damn, that is some bad art.

Because doing a story about a real life nation requires a shitload of research and dogshit like that.

Easier to just make up a nation, give it a general location and just continue to make shit up.

Nope. That shit all actually happened.
And even if it were a publicity stunt, it was still a huge international incident with a nuke-armed dictatorship run by a madman that earned a FBI terrorism investigation.

>He was not a fair and just ruler.
But he kept things in line. He was the cork in the bottle, as with many dictators in he middle east.
>Funding rebels against Assad was right
No. If you think arming a bunch of rampaging desperate illiterates are somehow capable of running a collapsed country then you are as dumb as you are disillusioned.

>funding the Maquis
The french was ousting a foreign power that occupied their lands. Syrian rebels are a bunch of murderous cuntbags that want to put their own flavor of oppression in power.

>It's real to me

The upper echelon of North Korea are smarter and more rational than they appear. They all know what's up. Kim Jong-un was educated in Switzerland for God's sake. It's all bluster.