The Instigator
ishallannoyyo
Pro (for)
Losing
5 Points
The Contender
Agent_Orange
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Batman is a better superhero than Iron Man

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Agent_Orange
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/9/2012 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 11,161 times Debate No: 25095
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (3)

 

ishallannoyyo

Pro

I believe that Batman is a better superhero than Iron Man. The Dark Knight Trilogy was awesome (go see the movies, NOW). We will have a shared BOP.

Definitions:
Batman - the superhero Bruce Wayne from the DC universe
Iron Man - the superhero Tony Stark from the Marvel universe
Better Superhero - the person that best exemplifies heroic qualities using their super powers

There will be no semantics and no trolling. Any definition changes my opponent would like to make MUST BE POSTED IN R1. Note: the two aren't fighting each other and the debate is on who would win, the debate is on who is a better super hero.

I look forward to a fun debate!
Agent_Orange

Con

Ok. But I ask that we use the mainstream continuity of the superheroes plus the most recent film franchises.
Debate Round No. 1
ishallannoyyo

Pro

I thank my opponent for accepting this debate. I agree to my opponent’s request.

C1: BATMAN NEVER KILLS

Clearly, a quality of a hero is someone who refuses to stoop to the level of his opponents, someone who uses non-lethal force, someone who refuses to let another person experience what Bruce Wayne experienced that fateful night in a dark Gotham alley. Batman has never killed if he could. Is a superhero someone who mercilessly slaughters his enemies, claiming that since they are criminals it’s justified? No, Batman has never stooped to that level. In the Dark Knight, Batman purposely swerves his motorcycle out of the way of the Joker and crashes, almost resulting in his death.

C2: BATMAN REFUSES TO COMPROMISE HIS PRINCIPLES

Someone who is a hero refuses to compromise what he believes in. Batman believes so fiercely in not killing, in the Dark Knight Rises movie he knocks a gun out of Catwoman’s hands in the middle of a fight. In the Dark Knight he takes down the people who are trying to help him (help him using a healthy amount of lethal weapons) and ties them up, leaving them for the police. Batman has never taken the easy route and has always stuck to his principles and has never compromised them. “You truly are incorruptible, aren’t you? You won’t kill me out of some misplaced sense of self-righteousness. And I won’t kill you because you’re just too much fun. I think you and I are destined to do this forever!” – The Joker to Batman in the Dark Knight

C3: BATMAN HAS HELPED PEOPLE IN NEED

This is clear point, but not in the way that you think. It is true that Batman has helped people in a direct way, saving their lives, combating crime etc, but Batman has had a much more profound impact on the people of Gotham. Batman has instilled into the people of Gotham hope, the idea of good. In the Dark Knight, the people on the boat come awfully close to detonating the bomb on the other boat, but they don’t. “This city just showed you that it’s full of people ready to believe in good.” – Batman to Joker in the Dark Knight. Batman has been the role model for this good. Batman has forever shown the people of Gotham good.

For these reasons, VOTE PRO.

Agent_Orange

Con

C1: BATMAN NEVER KILLS

Counter-argument 1: Batman moral code says he'll never kill. And we are supposed to see this as a good thing. Sometimes it can be but it allows his enemies to love and fight another day. Namely the Joker. You see, Iron Man does not mercilessly slaughter his enemies. But if you're a danger to society, a danger to civilians, he will kill you. That's his sacrifice. He'll live with blood on his hands just so some maniac doesn't blow up a boat full of women and children.

C2: BATMAN REFUSES TO COMPROMISE HIS PRINCIPLES

Counter-argument 1: see above

C3: BATMAN HAS HELPED PEOPLE IN NEED

Counter-Argument 3:

I'm not sure what point my opponent is attempting to make here.

Argument 1: Iron Man is much much more effective

Well first off his suit is a thousand times more complex and advanced. Had been in the Dark Knight trilogy, he would have made very short work of all three villians.

Argument 2. Bruce wayne is useless

Batman is a symbol for peace and all that but Bruce wayne, as far as the world is concerned, is an idiot. Tony Stark donates billions to charity, builds intelli-crops in developing nations, and is working on free, clean energy. Batman tries to do clean energy. It gets turned into a bomb.
Debate Round No. 2
ishallannoyyo

Pro


I thank my opponent for his comments. I would now like to take this time to refute some of the arguments brought forth by my opponent.



Batman moral code says he’ll never kill. And we are supposed to see this as a good thing. Sometimes it can be but it allows his enemies to love and fight another day.



What my opponent is essentially saying is that if someone is posing a menace to society, it is acceptable to kill them. Following this logic, police officers should be allowed to shoot to kill thieves, jaywalkers, and speeders as they are posing a threat to society. Batman’s moral code is what separates him from the villains, it is the line that divides hero and murderer. It doesn’t matter if he is killing the Joker or Two-Face, it is still murder which is most certainly NOT a hero characteristic. Batman’s will power is so great, he can operate a Green Lantern Power Ring. [2] Batman would never compromise his morals and beliefs, something a hero is. Would we consider Abraham Lincoln to be a hero if he just quit his attempts to end slavery?



Counter-argument 1: see above.


This counter-argument has already been refuted.



I’m not sure what point my opponent is attempting to make here.


My point is very clear. Batman has been a role model for Gotham, showing the people that good is possible in a city like Gotham City, a city that has been condemned by many as a wasteland. Through his position as a role model, he has helped people do good.



Well first off his suit is a thousand times more complex and advanced. Had been in the Dark Knight triology, he would have made very short work of all three villains.


I don’t understand my opponent’s point here. I would invite him to elaborate on how having a complex suit helps him exemplify heroic qualities. Does Batman get the job done? Yes.



Batman is a symbol of peace and all that


So my opponent is essentially agreeing with my 3rd Contention.



But Bruce Wayne, as far as the world is concerned, is an idiot.


First of all, Bruce Wayne isn’t just some “idiot”. His behavior is just an act to hide the fact that he is Batman. Also, Batman has genius level intellect so he isn’t a complete moron. [2]



Tony Stark donates billions to charity


Yet Bruce Wayne is richer according to Forbes. [1] Furthermore, Bruce Wayne is also a philanthropist. He has funded many projects, built many things for Gotham, and has even donated his mansion to a boy’s home in Gotham.



Batman tries to do clean energy. It gets turned into a bomb.


Is this somehow Batman’s fault? I would invite my opponent to elaborate more on this point.



So it is clear that Batman exemplifies heroic qualities far more than Iron Man. I have refuted all of my opponent’s points and my opponent has failed to refute any of my points. It is clear for Voters to Vote Pro!



SOURCES


1.http://www.forbes.com...



2.http://dc.wikia.com...(Bruce_Wayne)


Agent_Orange

Con

Ok let's do this.

What my opponent is essentially saying is that if someone is posing a menace to society, it is acceptable to kill them. Following this logic, police officers should be allowed to shoot to kill thieves, jaywalkers, and speeders as they are posing a threat to society.

Ok this is a very blatant strawman. I did not say anything about just killing people just because. Iron Man doesn't just slaughter people as you would have the voters believe. In fact in his two films he doesn't kill anything that isn't a robot or actively pointing guns at women and children.

Is this murder to you? This broad daylight in a middle eastern village, Batman would have gotten owned if he tried to save these people. His moral stance is ridiculous, and inconsistent. Note at the end of Batman Begins he blows up the train tracks and chooses not to save Ra's Al Ghul. He decided he was too dangerous to live. Yet he refuses to Joker. Joker then brings the city of Gotham to it's knees.

My point is very clear. Batman has been a role model for Gotham, showing the people that good is possible in a city like Gotham City, a city that has been condemned by many as a wasteland. Through his position as a role model, he has helped people do good.

Has he really? Before Batman all the people of Gotham City had to worry about was Mafia dudes and crooked cops. Because of batman though they have an ancient ninja tribe poisoning them with fear gas, a killer clown who blows up hospitals and puts bombs on boats, and a mercenary with a goddamn nuke!


I don’t understand my opponent’s point here. I would invite him to elaborate on how having a complex suit helps him exemplify heroic qualities. Does Batman get the job done? Yes.


Barely. For example in TDKR Batman gets destroyed in second by Bane. That allows Bane to take over the city and slaughter an entire football team and trap the entire police force underground. Iron Man would have humiliated Bane and picked up a supermodel on his way home. Now that's heroic!

First of all, Bruce Wayne isn’t just some “idiot”. His behavior is just an act to hide the fact that he is Batman. Also, Batman has genius level intellect so he isn’t a complete moron.

That's my point. The world sees him as an idiot because he wastes his money instead of doing......I don't know...literally everything else. Again I say Iron Man is working on free unlimited energy with his money, and feeds the hungry in Africa. And he does it as Tony Stark.

Yet Bruce Wayne is richer according to Forbes. [1] Furthermore, Bruce Wayne is also a philanthropist. He has funded many projects, built many things for Gotham, and has even donated his mansion to a boy’s home in Gotham.

Ok Forbes has no idea what they're talking about. They just put together a random list of characters and assigned them values. Note this was written in 2007, while the first Iron Man film was released in 2008. Give me a break, TDKR specifically says that both Wayne Interprises and Wayne himself are flat broke. Furthermore this is how much it cost to be Batman http://www.buzzfeed.com... this is how much it cost to be Iron Man http://www.geeksaresexy.net...;

Big Difference.

Is this somehow Batman’s fault? I would invite my opponent to elaborate more on this point.

Yes It's his fault! if you think it has the potential to be dangerous, get rid of it! Don't keep it as a trophy!

Batman is a great hero but he falls short in comparison with Iron Man. Vote Stark/Rhodes for President 2012!
Debate Round No. 3
ishallannoyyo

Pro


I thank my opponent for his comments.


Is this murder to you?


Yes.



Batman would have gotten owned if he tried to save these people.


Incorrect. In the Batman trilogy, Batman saves numerous hostages without being shot and without having to kill anyone.



Note at the end of Batman Begins he blows up the train tracks and chooses not to save Ra’s Al Ghul.


My opponent clearly doesn’t understand the Batman universe and the fact that Ra’s Al Ghul has survived so much more than a train wreck. Ra’s Al Ghul didn’t die.



Has he really? Before Batman all the people of Gotham City had to worry about was Mafia dudes and crooked cops.


Once again my opponent shows a lack of Batman knowledge. The entire city was ruled by the Maroni and Falcone family, Ra’s Al Ghul would have destroyed the city anyways, and it was far worse before Batman.



Barely.


Does he get the job done or not? Having a suit doesn’t make Iron Man more of a hero.



The world sees him as an idiot because he wastes his money instead of doing…I don’t know…literally anything else.


Just because Batman doesn’t build schools in Africa doesn’t make him less of a hero and as I have already shown Batman has been doing philanthropic work for Gotham for YEARS, yet my opponent just brushes this point aside.



Ok Forbes has no idea what they’re talking about.


First of all, Forbes is a very respected magazine that doesn’t just randomly compile numbers. Secondly, it doesn’t matter who is richer. My point was that Batman has money to do philanthropic work, and he does.



Yes it’s his fault! If you think it has the potential to be dangerous, get rid of it! Don’t keep it as a trophy!


It wasn’t kept as a trophy. Secondly, it had a safety mechanism and it was thought to be safe. It wasn’t at all Batman’s fault.



My opponent has failed to fulfill his BOP, he hasn’t shown why Iron Man exemplifies heroic qualities more than Batman. His only arguments were that Iron Man has a fancy suit and he does philanthropic work. I have refuted both arguments. I have brought forth the fact that Batman doesn’t kill, refuses to compromise his principles, and has been a symbol of peace, prosperity, and good for the city of Gotham. He has given Gotham hope. For these reasons, Vote PRO.



Agent_Orange

Con

So shooting someone who is threatening a child with a gun is murder? That's absurd and I'm sure the voters agrees with me.


Incorrect. In the Batman trilogy, Batman saves numerous hostages without being shot and without having to kill anyone.

No he doesn't. The only time he comes close is when their are doctors disguised as hostages and he breaks the privacy laws of every citizen in Gotham. And let's talk about that. How heroic is wiping your butt with the constitution, to cover your ineptitude? That's not being the world's greatest detective, that's being the world's richest spy.

But back to my original point Batman would have not been able to do anything versus those terrorist Iron Man easily took out. It's the middle of the daytime. Batman is only effective at night. This is shown in the by the bank robbery at the beginning of TDK that he never shows up for.

My opponent clearly doesn’t understand the Batman universe and the fact that Ra’s Al Ghul has survived so much more than a train wreck. Ra’s Al Ghul didn’t die.

I know all about Ra's Al Ghul's Lazarus pits. Only problem is that in Nolan's batverse, Ra's is dead. It's what drives the entire plot of the third movie.

Once again my opponent shows a lack of Batman knowledge. The entire city was ruled by the Maroni and Falcone family, Ra’s Al Ghul would have destroyed the city anyways, and it was far worse before Batman.

Only because Bruce Wayne told him how messed up Gotham was. That creates the conflict in the first and third movies. I'd rather have the mob running things than mercenaries who plan to blow up the entire city.

Does he get the job done or not? Having a suit doesn’t make Iron Man more of a hero.

If you can call it getting the job done. In the third film he gets his back broken is is imprisoned for months! If Bane wasn't suffering from Bond Villain Stupidity, he could have killed him or blown up the city anytime he wanted to but for the plots sake, he doesn't. Even when he sees that batman is back, he decides to do nothing.

Now as for Iron Man's suit, he does make him a better hero because he's a much more effective hero. Bane, Scarecrow, and The Joker wouldn't last seconds against Iron Man, so thousands of lives would have been saved.

Just because Batman doesn’t build schools in Africa doesn’t make him less of a hero and as I have already shown Batman has been doing philanthropic work for Gotham for YEARS, yet my opponent just brushes this point aside.

It does make him less of a hero! Iron Man saves the world and batman saves a city. Which is more heroic?

First of all, Forbes is a very respected magazine that doesn’t just randomly compile numbers. Secondly, it doesn’t matter who is richer. My point was that Batman has money to do philanthropic work, and he does.

Yeah, a respected financial magazine but they know nothing about comic book characters.

It wasn’t kept as a trophy. Secondly, it had a safety mechanism and it was thought to be safe. It wasn’t at all Batman’s fault.


Did you watch the movie? He knew it wasn't safe, that's why he never used it.

His only arguments were that Iron Man has a fancy suit and he does philanthropic work. I have refuted both arguments.

No you have not. Iron Man doesn't have a "fancy" suit. He has a much more effective suit. He can fly at mach speeds, he has super strength, an advanced AI, machine guns, rockets, and lasers. He would tear batman's villians apart. That makes him better because he's more efficient. Thousands die in that batman trilogy all on batman's watch.

As for the charity work, you said he only donates to stuff in Gotham. So he doesn't care about the rest of the world?

Iron Man is the clear winner here.


Debate Round No. 4
ishallannoyyo

Pro

I thank my opponent for a thought provoking and interesting debate.

So shooting someone who is threatening a child with a gun is murder? That’s absurd and I’m sure the voters agree with me.

I’m assuming we are acting under the same definition of murder, which is purposely killing of another human being. Following this definition, Iron Man is a mass murderer, having purposely killed numerous people in Iron Man 1, 2, and the Avengers. I realize what my opponent is trying to do here, because we saved someone’s life it is acceptable to kill someone. Well, it isn’t. It is still murder. Batman, unlike Iron Man, saves people’s lives and DOESN’T MURDER ANYONE IN THE PROCESS.

No he doesn’t. The only time he comes close is when there are doctors disguised as hostages.

How about all the people in the mansion, you know, the hundreds of people he saved from execution?

How heroic is wiping your butt with the constitution, to cover your ineptitude?

Considering how my opponent just refuses to accept the fact that Iron Man is a murderer, therefore isn’t it “acceptable” that he violated people’s rights to save people? Following my opponent’s logic, it is. Also, Batman destroyed the machine immediately after.

Batman is only effective at night. This is shown in the by the bank robbery at the beginning of TDK that he never shows up for.

Had my opponent watched the movie carefully, he would notice that at the beginning two of Joker’s henchmen on the roof of the bank destroyed the bank’s secret alarm out to the police. As the henchman says: “That’s weird, it was trying to call a private number, and not the police.” That private number is Batman. Secondly, in The Dark Knight Rises Batman engages in daytime fighting had my opponent watched the movie.

I know all about Ra’s Al Ghul’s Lazarus pits. Only problem is that in Nolan’s batverse, Ra’s is dead. It’s what drives the entire plot of the third movie.

I wasn’t talking about the Lazarus pits, it is the effect the Lazarus pits had on Ra’s after his continued use. Ra’s had all the life sucked out of him by an Egyptian mummy and survived. He is essentially immortal. He can survive a train wreck. Secondly, my opponent specifically requested we use the mainstream continuity and recent film franchises as our sources. The “mainstream continuity” isn’t just limited to Nolan’s batverse. Finally, Ra’s death isn’t what drives the plot at all in the third movie.

Only because Bruce Wayne told him how messed up Gotham was. That creates the conflict in the first and third movies. I’d rather have the mob running things than mercenaries who plan to blow up the entire city.

Once again, a lack of Batman knowledge. Ra’s entire plan even before he met Bruce was to destroy Gotham BECAUSE of the fact that the mob controlled EVERYTHING.

Now as for Iron Man’s suit, he does make him a better hero because he’s a much more effective hero. Bane, Scarecrow, and the Joker wouldn’t last seconds against Iron Man.

It’s more effective, because Iron Man uses guns. Batman doesn’t as guns were what caused his parent’s death and he doesn’t believe in killing. Iron Man has no issue eliminating threats. Batman believes in taking them alive, taking them to the police and justice and possibly rehabilitation in Arkham Asylum. Iron Man is more effective because he has no problem murdering people. Batman gets it done, saves thousands of lives, and doesn’t kill anyone in the process.

It does make him less of a hero! Iron Man saves the world and Batman saves a city. Which is more heroic?

Batman cares far more for his city. His attention is completely focused on making his home a better place, that is just as heroic as Iron Man caring little amounts for a vast place. Batman has gone to congress to persuade the government not to condemn Gotham. He failed in this, so he returned to Gotham as Batman and fought DAY AND NIGHT to retake the entire city from the gangs roaming the city after NML (No Man’s Land).

Yeah, a respected financial magazine but they know nothing about comic book characters.

Forbes doesn’t randomly compile numbers, they actually do math to figure out how much these people are worth. For example, Smaug from the Hobbit is considered one of the richest fictional characters ever. They calculated his worth using his length, the number of scales on an average dragon’s belly, the size of the cave, how much of the room Smaug took up, how much air took up, and then the final percentage is how much the gold and silver took up. Using the value of gold and silver at the time, they came to his net worth being around 8.6 billion dollars.

Did you watch the movie? He knew it wasn’t safe, that’s why he never used it.

I might ask the same question to you. He knew its POTENTIAL danger, yet he had a failsafe mechanism. If everything that was potentially dangerous was gotten rid of, Iron Man’s suit wouldn’t exist.

He has a much more effective suit.

Because he has “super strength, an advanced AI, machine guns, rockets, and lasers”. In the Iron Man movies, inside his helmet the screen is usually showing a targeting cross hair. He’s effective because he kills. Whiplash, killed. Obadiah, killed.

So he doesn’t care about the rest of the world?

I never said he doesn’t care about the rest of the world, but his focus is Gotham. He focuses on Gotham far more than Iron Man on the world.

Batman is the clear winner. He doesn’t murder anyone, refuses to compromise his principles, and has shown the people of Gotham that peace and good is possible in their lives. He has been a beacon of hope and peace for the people. Iron Man is effective only because he has no issue murdering people. VOTE PRO.

“A hero can be anyone. Even a man doing something as simple and reassuring as putting a coat around a little boy's shoulder to let him know that the world hadn't ended.” - Batman

Agent_Orange

Con


"I’m assuming we are acting under the same definition of murder, which is purposely killing of another human being. Following this definition, Iron Man is a mass murderer, having purposely killed numerous people in Iron Man 1, 2, and the Avengers. I realize what my opponent is trying to do here, because we saved someone’s life it is acceptable to kill someone. Well, it isn’t. It is still murder. Batman, unlike Iron Man, saves people’s lives and DOESN’T MURDER ANYONE IN THE PROCESS."


My opponent seems to be operating under black and white morality. Under his definition we should lock up all our armed forces and police force. That's absurd. Secondly Iron Man doesn't kill people for sport. He only killed terrorist armed with high tech weaponry and tries to save the man who tried to kill him twice. In the second one, he doesn't kill anyone at all and in the Avengers he kills aliens that are invading earth. Think about all the people that have died because Batman refused to kill one man? Thousands! Am I saying their lives are worth more than the villains? Yes. I value the lives of citizens over the lives of terrorist. But my opponent line of reasoning is "It doesn't matter how many people he kills, just as long as he doesn't die"

How about all the people in the mansion, you know, the hundreds of people he saved from execution?


I have no idea what you're talking about. Do you mean in the second film when he jumps out a window to save his girlfriend, leaving the joker and his armed thugs with a room full of people? Speaking of that scene how the hell does Joker escape that? Batman is at the bottom floor and Joker is at the top. Does he fly away out a window? Batman literally has his enemy trapped yet still he allows him to escape. Incompetent...

"Considering how my opponent just refuses to accept the fact that Iron Man is a murderer, therefore isn’t it “acceptable” that he violated people’s rights to save people? Following my opponent’s logic, it is. Also, Batman destroyed the machine immediately after."


Right. Notice how Iron Man only violates the "rights" of murderers while Batman violates the right of EVERYONE IN THE CITY.


Had my opponent watched the movie carefully, he would notice that at the beginning two of Joker’s henchmen on the roof of the bank destroyed the bank’s secret alarm out to the police. As the henchman says: “That’s weird, it was trying to call a private number, and not the police.” That private number is Batman. Secondly, in The Dark Knight Rises Batman engages in daytime fighting had my opponent watched the movie.


I did watch the movie I saw him get stabbed and saved by a deus ex machina. Heroic.


Secondly, my opponent specifically requested we use the mainstream continuity and recent film franchises as our sources. The “mainstream continuity” isn’t just limited to Nolan’s batverse. Finally, Ra’s death isn’t what drives the plot at all in the third movie.

Yes but I'm specifically referring to Nolan's batverse in which Ra's is not immortal. So Batman killed him. And because he did that Ra's' Daughter comes for revenge in the third film


It’s more effective, because Iron Man uses guns. Batman does’t as guns were what caused his parent’s death and he doesn’t believe in killing. Iron Man has no issue eliminating threats. Batman believes in taking them alive, taking them to the police and justice and possibly rehabilitation in Arkham Asylum. Iron Man is more effective because he has no problem murdering people. Batman gets it done, saves thousands of lives, and doesn’t kill anyone in the process.

Again, Iron Man does not murder people. He kills terrorist armed with high tech weaponry. These people didn't have anyone to answer to. They were the authority. And they were armed with missiles and tanks. The world is better off without them. And again how many people have died due to Batman retarded moral stance? He's not even effective either! Twice in the series all the prisoners escaped!! Twice! The first time, everyone was high on fear gas, the second time, they all had guns and every police officer was locked underground. Armed murderers and rapist roaming the streets for 5 months! Make no mistake thousands of people have died under Batman's so called "watch"

Batman cares far more for his city. His attention is completely focused on making his home a better place, that is just as heroic as Iron Man caring little amounts for a vast place.

Lol what? What makes you think Iron Ma cares so little? Watch the attached video . That's a random village that had nothing to do with him. If he didn't care he wouldn't have flown his untested suit into a battle zone. And secondly are you saying that caring a lot about a small place is more heroic than caring about the welfare of the entire planet? Is that seriously your logic?

Forbes doesn’t randomly compile numbers, they actually do math to figure out how much these people are worth. For example, Smaug from the Hobbit is considered one of the richest fictional characters ever. They calculated his worth using his length, the number of scales on an average dragon’s belly, the size of the cave, how much of the room Smaug took up, how much air took up, and then the final percentage is how much the gold and silver took up. Using the value of gold and silver at the time, they came to his net worth being around 8.6 billion dollars.


It's still a moot point because

a) The article was written before the release of the first Iron Man film


b) I've already shown proof that Iron Man has more money

c) THE DARK KNIGHT RISES EXPLICITLY SAYS THAT BRUCE WAYNE IS FLAT BROKE AND SO IS WAYNE INTERPRISES.



Because he has “super strength, an advanced AI, machine guns, rockets, and lasers”. In the Iron Man movies, inside his helmet the screen is usually showing a targeting cross hair. He’s effective because he kills. Whiplash, killed. Obadiah, killed.



WOW. Why would you lie like that? Tony tries to pull Obadiah up but Obadiah refuses to be saved. And Vanko blew himselft up. Don't lie to the people dude.


I never said he doesn’t care about the rest of the world, but his focus is Gotham. He focuses on Gotham far more than Iron Man on the world.


How are you coming up with this?

Vote Con

Even my opponent admits Iron Man is more effective.
Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Korashk 5 years ago
Korashk
Batman sometimes kills, although a lot of them have been retconned. He also tried to kill Darksied not too long ago.
Posted by Agent_Orange 5 years ago
Agent_Orange
Just noticed that the links concerning the cost of being Batman or being Iron Man somehow got messed up.
Here are the links

Batman: http://www.buzzfeed.com...

Iron Man: http://www.geeksaresexy.net...
Posted by ishallannoyyo 5 years ago
ishallannoyyo
IKR!! xD
Posted by Maikuru 5 years ago
Maikuru
There's a new one of these every 2 weeks.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by badbob 5 years ago
badbob
ishallannoyyoAgent_OrangeTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: I did not see con argue for iron man than trying to bash batman.
Vote Placed by Korashk 5 years ago
Korashk
ishallannoyyoAgent_OrangeTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro argued their side of the debate very poorly. Especially the insistence on using a faulty definition of murder and a failure to actually address most of Con's points. Con on the other hand addresses and counters all of Pro's points. The clear winner is Agent_Orange.
Vote Placed by adontimasu 5 years ago
adontimasu
ishallannoyyoAgent_OrangeTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con has provided efficient reasoning to believe that the death of those whom Iron Man kills in the mainstream accepted continuities. Pro's only retort to this particular point is that murder is wrong, but does not go against Con's point that the death of these few saved thousands, maybe millions of lives, while Batman's philosophy has (no doubt) killed thousands. Furthermore, Con is correct in saying that Iron Man would be a more efficient hero, a point Pro does not contend. Victory: Con.