Could bad guys like Dr. Doom ruling the world be a bad thing?

[Vegeta]

Can someone please specify for us which story this was that suggested Doom felt "entitled" to grab a Latverian woman and force her to sleep with him that night if she knew what was good for her? I get the impression, from what you say, that it was something Steve Englehart wrote way, way back in the 1970s, but it would be easier to talk about it if we knew exactly what issue of what title we're supposed to be talking about!

Super Villain Team-Up issue 7, this very site had a whole write up on the damn thing.

http://goodcomics.comicbookresources...-peasant-girl/

P.S. This is the sort of question that comes up all the time when we comic book fans start arguing the fine points of continuity: If something really nasty or bizarre was mentioned in one story, many years ago, and every other writer to deal with the same characters has cheerfully ignored that embarrassing old story ever since, does that nasty or bizarre item "really count as a Canonical Fact in the modern continuity"? Or has it implicitly been "Mopee'd out of existence and should never be worried about again"?

I'm sure Bryne probably retconned it into a Doombot or something. (Because a robot wanting carnal relations with a peasant girl and tearing off his own tunic when the pain from the heat became unbearable makes a whole lotta sense. )

[Mark]

I still think that Doom wouldn't want anything to do with a woman who didn't have sense enough to fall to his feet and beg him for attention, he's that much of an egotist. But the Supervillain Team Up issue aside when I think of the mu I still maintain that Doom certainly would be any worse that Fury/Stark with SHIELD or Osborn with HAMMER or any of the other alphabet agencies with equally callous megalomaniacs in charge. When I think of people like Hill, Gyrich, Stryker, Brand and what they do with the power they have Doom seems to be almost a breath of fresh air. They do the same thing Doom does and they claim it to be in the interest of the world or the US, just Doom would claim that what ever he does is in the interest of Latveria or the world. Except for power there isn't a lot of difference between them. No rules, no laws and no concern for anything that gets in the way of their goals.

[Marvel Forever]

I benevolent dictator would not necessarily be all that bad of a thing, especially he he could control crime and provide jobs and health care for all.

[DrNewGod]

I still think that Doom wouldn't want anything to do with a woman who didn't have sense enough to fall to his feet and beg him for attention, he's that much of an egotist.

Opinions vary. IMO, if Doom ever decided carnal relations weren't beneath him, he's unlikely to accept any but the most perfect, unattainable of partners. A partner that had to be won, and that ONLY Doom could possibly win. Certainly not one more bootlicker; he's got oodles of those.

...I still maintain that Doom certainly would be any worse that Fury/Stark with SHIELD or Osborn with HAMMER or any of the other alphabet agencies with equally callous megalomaniacs in charge. When I think of people like Hill, Gyrich, Stryker, Brand and what they do with the power they have Doom seems to be almost a breath of fresh air. They do the same thing Doom does and they claim it to be in the interest of the world or the US, just Doom would claim that what ever he does is in the interest of Latveria or the world. Except for power there isn't a lot of difference between them. No rules, no laws and no concern for anything that gets in the way of their goals.

Other than the fact that the others (Osborn aside) that you mention aren't attempting to rule the earth.

[electr1cgoblin]

I benevolent dictator would not necessarily be all that bad of a thing, especially he he could control crime and provide jobs and health care for all.

Just curious; would you support a politician who would do these things, all at the expense of your personal freedom of expression, including freedom to assemble, freedom of speech, freedom to own arms, freedom to vote, etc.? Because I think that's what a reign of Doom (or any other dictator) would be like.

[Mark]

Other than the fact that the others (Osborn aside) that you mention aren't attempting to rule the earth.

Not openly. They are satisfied with their own little covert fiefdoms, but if they thought that a part of solving the problem (whatever problem that was) involved taking over the world and becoming a secret shadow government, they'd do it. Doom's the type who would rule openly with palaces and statues, Hill and her type would stay in the shadows and operate through puppets. That's why I favor someone like Doom over them.

[dragonmp93]

Just curious; would you support a politician who would do these things, all at the expense of your personal freedom of expression, including freedom to assemble, freedom of speech, freedom to own arms, freedom to vote, etc.? Because I think that's what a reign of Doom (or any other dictator) would be like.

Well, given that we are talking about the hellhole 616 universe, and not about real life.............................................

[Lorendiac]

Just curious; would you support a politician who would do these things, all at the expense of your personal freedom of expression, including freedom to assemble, freedom of speech, freedom to own arms, freedom to vote, etc.? Because I think that's what a reign of Doom (or any other dictator) would be like.

I very much doubt that Doom cares whether or not you have a pistol under your jacket and a rifle at home in your closet -- even if you live in a land which he rules.

I think it's been made clear at various times that his metal suit of armor is seriously augmented by invisible forcefields, making him essentially bulletproof. So what does he care about any conventional firearms you keep around for self-defense against ordinary human beings?

[electr1cgoblin]

I very much doubt that Doom cares whether or not you have a pistol under your jacket and a rifle at home in your closet -- even if you live in a land which he rules.

I think it's been made clear at various times that his metal suit of armor is seriously augmented by invisible forcefields, making him essentially bulletproof. So what does he care about any conventional firearms you keep around for self-defense against ordinary human beings?

Not sure, you could be extrapolating from assumed facts. I'd say Doom would want ALL the power in the country, whether it represented a direct threat to him or not. If people felt more as if they could protect themselves, that's just that much less protection they would need from Doom, and I doubt he'd want to cede that power over them.

[dragonmp93]

Not sure, you could be extrapolating from assumed facts. I'd say Doom would want ALL the power in the country, whether it represented a direct threat to him or not. If people felt more as if they could protect themselves, that's just that much less protection they would need from Doom, and I doubt he'd want to cede that power over them.

Well, given that regular guns are only effective against a small group of superhéroes/supervillains, i dont think that Doctor Doom would fell that his control is weakened by that.

[Mark]

I think Doom would consider a gun to be no more dangerous than a slingshot. He'd let the people have them to give them an illusion of power and independence. A group of rebels with guns would be about as dangerous to his doombots as a spring shower against a stone roof.

[Iron Maiden]

I think Doom would consider a gun to be no more dangerous than a slingshot. He'd let the people have them to give them an illusion of power and independence. A group of rebels with guns would be about as dangerous to his doombots as a spring shower against a stone roof.

I'd have to think that they would need them for game hunting etc.

What isn't clear is whether or not the people have internet access. I can see Doom controlling the local press but what about blogs, etc.

[Mark]

I'd have to think that they would need them for game hunting etc.

What isn't clear is whether or not the people have internet access. I can see Doom controlling the local press but what about blogs, etc.

Easily done. He can run up a few programs to simulate bloggers and posters and anyone on a board or a blog who posted something contrary to what Doom considered proper would be confronted and disagreed with by the simulations posters or bloggers who simply shout them down. I've been driven off boards by constant negative attacks, bloggers can be shut down by counter bloggers or service outages. Once the point is driven home that you are too negative, that you will be ridiculed and attacked for anything that goes against the grain it takes an extremely stubborn person to keep posting and you can really only keep up for so long before you simply give up from exhaustion. When you put up a post and the next day or even the next hour you get a ten to one response demanding that you explain in detail every single point you made and that for those ten responses you make you will get at least three more demands for even greater clarification... No one can really stand against that for long.