Isn't It Ironic?

[Mantis Zero]

Originally Posted by KoRevo,September 25, 2006 07:06 pm

Personally i didnt see Ana's 'hostage situation' quite like you do. i fee that by firing a warning shot past Mike she was doing what she had been trained to do as a cop in order to calm dangerous situations down. She didnt kill the man and she didnt even main him. She was reacting..thats the thing.. Mike wasnt reacting to an on the spot dangeorus situation..he was..well, i dont know what the heck he was doing or thinking..but he killed Ana-lu. Theres no getting away from that really. To compare firing a warning shot with actually killing one of your own when there were other options is perhaps not the best thing to do to support an argument.

Ana was firing shots at an unarmed man who was concerned about a guy he had lived with for 42 days after his girlfriend has just been killed before his eyes. Why fire a warning shot for that? There was no threat to Ana she was taking a role as the problem rather than the solution. Ana also wasnt one of Mike's own, none of these people have any loyalties to each other whatsoever. Mike's "own" is Walt and Walt alone. This isnt even a similar situation to what Michael did, and you cant judge everything by comparing it to murder. Sawyer squashed a tree frog, but Michael killed Ana Lucia. Nevermind about the tree frog then hey?

And im not saying that you have literally said that Mike is a 'saint'..im merely saying that it Mike as been made to look cleaner than he perhaps should do after this recent episode. Especially when you consider that Ana has taken more stick for merely giving a man a gun than Mike has taken for putting 3 cold and hard bullets into his friends..

Thats exactly what you implied. I've said time and time again what he did was wrong, I've never put across any arguement that portrays him as squeeky clean but with that last sentance that seems to be what you're doing with Ana by playing down her crimes because she got killed. Again they werent her friends, he knew them for less than a week and his relationship with them was not a strong one or a particularly nice one. If he'd come along and put bullets into Jin and Sun then you'd have a valid point. Ana provided Michael with a murder weapon, the only thing that changed is who he murdered with it. Ana knew it was going to be used to kill when she handed it over.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one, Mantis. You rightly have your views and i rightly have mine..theres nothing wrong in that..i just wanted to discover the motivation and reasoning etc behind your point of view because i feel thats important when debating with people..it helps us to understand where were coming from. Alas, i still cannot fathom your viewpoint on this particular issue but i nonetheless still respect your views.

The thing is you seem to want everyone to completely lay into Michael for what he did just because they dislike Ana Lucia. Not a single person has said what Michael did was right but your insistance to clear Ana Lucia's name and portray her as an entirely innocent victim who never did a thing wrong is the reason why several people are arguing against your call to nail Michael to a cross and crucify him. And all the while you never once mention Libby, the actual innocent in this situation, just makes you wonder.

[Murgatroyd]

Originally Posted by KoRevo,September 25, 2006 07:17 pm

Just a shade you say!? Thats not enough dammit! Nah joking ..yeah i understand that we are not dealing in the real world here..however didnt you once say that real world values and belief systems should carry over into island-world?

In the context of a fictional show that's attempting to portray the horrendously negative consequences of the alternative, Rocco. I didn't mean that television viewers who happen to be drawn to wholly fictional negative characters should be condemned as accomplices to those fictional characters crimes....

[D-Roc]

Originally Posted by IM-LOST-WITH-LOST,September 25, 2006 08:21 pm

KACHING!!! nice point rocco.... ive trained you well ... somehow

lol, thanks..i think

[D-Roc]

Originally Posted by KoRevo,September 25, 2006 07:06 pm

Personally i didnt see Ana's 'hostage situation' quite like you do. i fee that by firing a warning shot past Mike she was doing what she had been trained to do as a cop in order to calm dangerous situations down. She didnt kill the man and she didnt even main him. She was reacting..thats the thing.. Mike wasnt reacting to an on the spot dangeorus situation..he was..well, i dont know what the heck he was doing or thinking..but he killed Ana-lu. Theres no getting away from that really. To compare firing a warning shot with actually killing one of your own when there were other options is perhaps not the best thing to do to support an argument.

Originally Posted by Mantis Zero

Ana was firing shots at an unarmed man who was concerned about a guy he had lived with for 42 days after his girlfriend has just been killed before his eyes. Why fire a warning shot for that? There was no threat to Ana she was taking a role as the problem rather than the solution.

Mantis..how can you find fault with this little thing when Mike has just burnt 3 holes in his 2 buddies!? Youre slating Ana for this yet you fail to see whats wrong with Mike turning a gun on his own people!???

Originally Posted by Mantis

Ana also wasnt one of Mike's own, none of these people have any loyalties to each other whatsoever. Mike's "own" is Walt and Walt alone.

Well we tend to divide these people up into groups..the others..the loties, etc..Ana, Libby and Mike are all 'losties'..therefore Ana and Libby were his own, Mantis.

Originally Posted by Mantis

This isnt even a similar situation to what Michael did, and you cant judge everything by comparing it to murder. Sawyer squashed a tree frog, but Michael killed Ana Lucia. Nevermind about the tree frog then hey?

EXACTLY Mantis!! WHat Ana did is far far less than what Mike did. Mike murdered 2 of his own when other logical options were at hand! There is no excuse for this type of behaviour, Mantis.

Originally Posted by KoRevo

And im not saying that you have literally said that Mike is a 'saint'..im merely saying that it Mike as been made to look cleaner than he perhaps should do after this recent episode. Especially when you consider that Ana has taken more stick for merely giving a man a gun than Mike has taken for putting 3 cold and hard bullets into his friends..

Originally Posted by Mantis

Thats exactly what you implied.

No..actually i said that you dont literally say the words 'he's a saint'..though your arguments, Mantis, make him out ot be one, when imo he's not.

Originally Posted by Mantis

I've said time and time again what he did was wrong,

And yet at every junture you talk down Ana in order to make Mike out to be squeaky clean I mean, you have made such an issue about her giving him the gun and yet hardly said anything negative about Mike actually murdering his own. I just feel that Ana's faults are being dragged up in order to cover up Mike's massive fall from grace. And the thing is..what Ana has done is nothing..nothing compared to what Mike has done, lol!

Originally Posted by KoRevo

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one, Mantis. You rightly have your views and i rightly have mine..theres nothing wrong in that..i just wanted to discover the motivation and reasoning etc behind your point of view because i feel thats important when debating with people..it helps us to understand where were coming from. Alas, i still cannot fathom your viewpoint on this particular issue but i nonetheless still respect your views.

Originally Posted by Mantis

The thing is you seem to want everyone to completely lay into Michael for what he did just because they dislike Ana Lucia. Not a single person has said what Michael did was right but your insistance to clear Ana Lucia's name and portray her as an entirely innocent victim who never did a thing wrong is the reason why several people are arguing against your call to nail Michael to a cross and crucify him. And all the while you never once mention Libby, the actual innocent in this situation, just makes you wonder.

Mantis, i have said time and time again that Ana is not morally perfect..I am quite happy to acknowledge her faults since i feel that this is healthy for good debate. I just feel that you dont give an inch when it comes to Mike..even when you discovered that he didnt 'have' to kill Ana as part of his mission you still want to lay into Ana for giving him the gun! It's almost as if you dont want to accept the fact that your fave has committed such a vulgar crime?

I dont want to crucify Mike, since he is still one of my faves, so you see i have no agenda here. And as for Libby..well i have mentioned her on many many occasions, Mantis. If you read back on my varying posts on this Ana/Mike issue then im sure you'll find them. Or perhaps it's you who doesnt read my posts? :P

I feel were gonna have to agree to disagree on this Mantis.

[Mantis Zero]

Originally Posted by KoRevo,September 26, 2006 04:44 pm

Mantis..how can you find fault with this little thing when Mike has just burnt 3 holes in his 2 buddies!? Youre slating Ana for this yet you fail to see whats wrong with Mike turning a gun on his own people!???

Because you didnt read what I just said, you cant compare crimes against other crimes they should all be judged individually. If a man kills somebody but then his friend kills him and somebody else does that make the first man an innocent victim because he himself was killed? This is what you seem to be failing to acknowledge.

Well we tend to divide these people up into groups..the others..the loties, etc..Ana, Libby and Mike are all 'losties'..therefore Ana and Libby were his own, Mantis.

They arent though, its not that simple and should not be seen in such a way. The only thing they have in common is they were on the same plane that crashed, there are no bonds or real friendships whatsoever between then. They are together by circumstance not by choice and that is no way to try and instill a loyalty scheme. Ana and Libby were even more removed from Michael's own since all he knew of them was being thrown in a bit, ordered around and abused by Ana during the time he spent with them.

EXACTLY Mantis!! WHat Ana did is far far less than what Mike did. Mike murdered 2 of his own when other logical options were at hand! There is no excuse for this type of behaviour, Mantis.

Again this is a wholly pointless arguement, you seem to have not read that one properly too. The whole point is you can say Jim stole a pen, but Chris murdered his wife so its ok. Nobodys making excuses.

And yet at every junture you talk down Ana in order to make Mike out to be squeaky clean   I mean, you have made such an issue about her giving him the gun and yet hardly said anything negative about Mike actually murdering his own. I just feel that Ana's faults are being dragged up in order to cover up Mike's massive fall from grace. And the thing is..what Ana has done is nothing..nothing compared to what Mike has done, lol!

Ana has commited crimes equally as bad as Michael, and I can assure Im not laying into Ana to cover for Michael, I've expressed my distatse for Ana ever since she first graced the screen and its absolutely nothing to do with Michael is any way. If you feel that is the case you are mistaken, Michael's actions do not effect the way we precieve Ana Lucia.

Mantis, i have said time and time again that Ana is not morally perfect..I am quite happy to acknowledge her faults since i feel that this is healthy for good debate. I just feel that you dont give an inch when it comes to Mike..even when you discovered that he didnt 'have' to kill Ana as part of his mission you still want to lay into Ana for giving him the gun! It's almost as if you dont want to accept the fact that your fave has committed such a vulgar crime?

I have in past posts, you seem to not want to accept the fact I've said what Michael did was wrong. So what he didnt have to kill Ana as a mission? He still did it, it doesnt really change anything except his motivation. Would you really have let him off completely just because Miss Klugh told him to kill her?

I dont want to crucify Mike, since he is still one of my faves, so you see i have no agenda here. And as for Libby..well i have mentioned her on many many occasions, Mantis. If you read back on my varying posts on this Ana/Mike issue then im sure you'll find them. Or perhaps it's you who doesnt read my posts? :P 

I've read them all Roco and I can assure you its all about Ana Lucia and Libby never gets a mention besides a casual namecheck. Your agenda is to try and convince people Ana was an innocent victim in this whole scenario when sadly this was far from the case. Ana was the crux, without her doing what she did it couldnt have happened regardless of what Michael (wrongly) did. Therefore she has some responsibility in her blind lust for revenge leading to her own death and also the death of the very person who told her not to do anything stupid. There's your irony.

[Murgatroyd]

Originally Posted by KoRevo,September 26, 2006 04:44 pm

i have said time and time again that Ana is not morally perfect..I am quite happy to acknowledge her faults since i feel that this is healthy for good debate.

Would you humour me a moment and actually do that? I mean, don't feel obliged to or anything, but I've never seen you identify Ana Lucia's faults and I'd be genuinely interested to know what you think they are.

[Murgatroyd]

Originally Posted by KoRevo,September 26, 2006 04:44 pm

EXACTLY Mantis!! WHat Ana did is far far less than what Mike did. Mike murdered 2 of his own when other logical options were at hand! There is no excuse for this type of behaviour, Mantis.

Mantis, Korevo, sorry to wade in here, but I just wanted to go GAH at something very briefly.

Korevo, you've sort of sidestepped the question here. Mantis was saying (I think - sorry if not) that 'Michael murdered two people' is not a satisfying response to the question of whether or not Ana Lucia has acted morally. It has no impact on the question. It seems, rather, to suggest that we're not allowed to discuss a character's crimes if they've been the victim of worse crimes themselves - as if, when person A steals £5000 and person B cuts off person A's arm, person A is suddenly no longer guilty of theft... or theft suddenly loses the status of crime because worse crimes have been committed. I do feel that stifles the debate somewhat. I want to talk about what Ana Lucia did to other people without reference to what Michael did to her, but it never quite seems to happen....

[D-Roc]

Originally Posted by Mantis Zero,September 26, 2006 06:14 pm

Because you didnt read what I just said, you cant compare crimes against other crimes they should all be judged individually. If a man kills somebody but then his friend kills him and somebody else does that make the first man an innocent victim because he himself was killed? This is what you seem to be failing to acknowledge.

They arent though, its not that simple and should not be seen in such a way. The only thing they have in common is they were on the same plane that crashed, there are no bonds or real friendships whatsoever between then. They are together by circumstance not by choice and that is no way to try and instill a loyalty scheme. Ana and Libby were even more removed from Michael's own since all he knew of them was being thrown in a bit, ordered around and abused by Ana during the time he spent with them.

Again this is a wholly pointless arguement, you seem to have not read that one properly too. The whole point is you can say Jim stole a pen, but Chris murdered his wife so its ok. Nobodys making excuses.

Ana has commited crimes equally as bad as Michael, and I can assure Im not laying into Ana to cover for Michael, I've expressed my distatse for Ana ever since she first graced the screen and its absolutely nothing to do with Michael is any way. If you feel that is the case you are mistaken, Michael's actions do not effect the way we precieve Ana Lucia.

I have in past posts, you seem to not want to accept the fact I've said what Michael did was wrong. So what he didnt have to kill Ana as a mission? He still did it, it doesnt really change anything except his motivation. Would you really have let him off completely just because Miss Klugh told him to kill her?

I've read them all Roco and I can assure you its all about Ana Lucia and Libby never gets a mention besides a casual namecheck. Your agenda is to try and convince people Ana was an innocent victim in this whole scenario when sadly this was far from the case. Ana was the crux, without her doing what she did it couldnt have happened regardless of what Michael (wrongly) did. Therefore she has some responsibility in her blind lust for revenge leading to her own death and also the death of the very person who told her not to do anything stupid. There's your irony.

Yes, crimes 'can' be judged individually but they can also be compared against one another -especially when there are no laws in place to sanction those crimes. Therefore it makes perfect sense to compare crimes up against one another.

Mantis, how else do you want to define them!? They are all losties..theres no getting away from that fact. Look how much is made of 'us and them' and all of that - it's clear that Mike, Libbs and Ana were on the same side - hence, they are his own. He murdered his own..i know it's hard to accept [because Mike's one of my faves too] but it's the sorry truth.

And it makes me laugh that you should say that Mike was 'abused by Ana'..especially when i remember Mike popping a cap in her!

I severly disagree Mantis, Ana's crimes are not as bad as Mike's in my view. Everything weve seen Ana do was out of protection for others or justifiable pain and anger. The day we lose a child from our [non-existant] wombs is the day we can judge Ana for popping a cap in Jasons butt. As for Mike, he killed 2 of his own when there was absolutely no need for it. Poor Libby..she had so much to look forward to..and not only her..what about Hurley. See, there are knock-on effects of Mike's actions, Mantis.

What he did was absolutely immoral in the extreme, im afraid.

I feel that too many excuses have been made for Mike. If Ana had killed him in this way then thered be uproar..and you'd be leading the charge against Ana, i think im right in saying?

To answer your question - yes, if it had turned out that he had to kill Ana as part of his mission then i certainly wouldnt be as opposed to this sympathy he has acquired.

Im afraid youre wrong about my agenda Mantis..because i have no agenda. I have nothing to gain from slautering Mike, because he is still my 3rd fave character [as you well know]. I call it how i see it and i feel that if Ana had killed Mike in this way then i'd be critical of her. I certainly wouldnt be defedning the woman for intentionally killing one of her own!!

Mantis, how on earth can you suggest that Ana was the 'crux'..did she pull the trigger, Mantis? Mike was the crux because it was him who made the choice to kill his own people..you cant start laying the blame at Ana's door just because your fave character has committed a God-awful crime!

If we were to aportion blame then it would be something like as follows:

Mike 90%
Ana 2%
Sawyer 2%
Michellaneous 6%

[E Pluribus Unum]

In my opinion it's

"THEE Others" 40%
Mike 44.9%
Ana 15%
Sawyer [lol] 0.1%

I'd just like to repeat what Murg said

Originally Posted by Murgatroyd,September 26, 2006 06:24 pm

Mantis, Korevo, sorry to wade in here, but I just wanted to go GAH at something very briefly.

Korevo, you've sort of sidestepped the question here. Mantis was saying (I think - sorry if not) that 'Michael murdered two people' is not a satisfying response to the question of whether or not Ana Lucia has acted morally. It has no impact on the question. It seems, rather, to suggest that we're not allowed to discuss a character's crimes if they've been the victim of worse crimes themselves - as if, when person A steals £5000 and person B cuts off person A's arm, person A is suddenly no longer guilty of theft... or theft suddenly loses the status of crime because worse crimes have been committed. I do feel that stifles the debate somewhat. I want to talk about what Ana Lucia did to other people without reference to what Michael did to her, but it never quite seems to happen....

Esspecially this...

'Michael murdered two people' is not a satisfying response to the question of whether or not Ana Lucia has acted morally.

i.e.
'....But what Mike did was worse" Isn't! a good argument...

This is why these thread[ssss] are going around in circles

[Hello Kitty]

I haven't had time to read much past page one as my boyfriends screaming for the pc so this might have been said already.
The others didn't say they were gonna kill Walt, just that Michael would never see him again, and i know that a parent will do anything to get/protect their child, but he could have found another way to get Walt back, maybe with the losties help, there was no time limit as they're not gonna kill Walt.
Just a thought

[D-Roc]

Originally Posted by Murgatroyd,September 26, 2006 06:15 pm

Would you humour me a moment and actually do that? I mean, don't feel obliged to or anything, but I've never seen you identify Ana Lucia's faults and I'd be genuinely interested to know what you think they are.

But surely this is not my job Murg? Im not the one slating a dead woman.

Ive said on many times that Ana is no saint, nor did she ever pretend to be one. I feel i critique Ana's pros 'and' cons alot more than most do with their own faves

:P