"It's the only way"

Also doesn't surprise me you agree with Thanos as I assumed a bunch of weirdos on this forum would.

If he speaks about costs, sure :-)) xx superheroes movies won't be made because the heroes are gone!

Without a bit of research or geting spoiled by some mangafreaks, its quite hard to find out the exact end. And lets be serious, its obv the good guys are going to win, because Dr Strange is always cheating and Thanos was in pain for what he did to the universe

Weirdos? It's only logical man.

Thanos with the IG is God. He could do anything he wanted, there are many ways to fix the issue he perceived with that power.

He could literally create infinite resources, he could make women only able to have 2 children to keep population in check, he could sterilize half the universe to cut down population within a few generations. He could make fucking infinite resources.

His plan was definitely the least thought out worst plan ever, according to his movie reasoning. I mean in the comics it makes sense because he wants death to love him. They tried to pull his idea from the comic and change his motivation which was a really bad idea imo. His movie motivation is literally the worst.

Which one of the stones allows you to create?

He could change people's perception of reality, but that wouldn't actually change anything.

I did prefer the comic book motive to the movie motive, but I'm still in agreement that population control is needed, and if you're that powerful, it might as well be you who does it.

Reality stone isn't about perception. It actually changes reality. And the stones when used together can do anything you want. Individually none of them have the power to create... Maybe reality stone, but together they are basically an infinite wish machine.

Didn't realize the power extended that much when you had all of them, that's just absurd. His motives still make sense because this was a plan he dreamed up well before knowing about the stones (at least in the movieverse), and while a normal person might change their course of action when dealing with an unlimited wish granting device, he's a stubborn fuck who's going to go with his original plan but on a much larger scale. Maybe I just feel that it's practical for our society while obvious the other options are completely impossible. Limiting births would be the most feasible besides genocide, but that would require a global level of cooperation, which is pretty much impossible.

Weird is wanting to kill half the population, yes. There’s other methods of population control and we shouldn’t worry about them until it’s necessary.

"Wanting to kill half the population" and understanding that we've already grown to an unsustainable population and knowing that some form of drastic correction is unavoidable are two WAY different things. Thanos doesn't want to kill people (at least not the movie version of Thanos), he's just doing what he feels is necessary to make life thrive. You can disagree with his methods or reasoning (or me agreeing with this as being the best/easiest solution), but not understanding the difference between the two things I mentioned above makes me worry that you're not capable of continuing this conversation. I'm not saying that you definitely are, nor am I trying to insult you in any way, just saying that you gotta be able to at least understand the difference between the ends for the sake of the means to have a conversation on the subject.

e: Even if the population stayed exactly where it is now for the next 100 years, which would take a level of enforcement and global cooperation that is not even remotely possible in the world we live in, we'd still be depleting our resources at an unsustainable rate. The earth has always corrected population and resource depletion by wiping out large amounts of the populous with disease, natural disasters, or by letting humans simply succumb to their baser instincts of killing one another. With the mass advancements in technology, medicine, and weaponry, we've gotten to a point where only small numbers of people are dying in comparison to the past, we're consuming at an unprecedented rate, we're living longer than ever before, we're able to avoid or recover from most horrific natural disasters, and we're not wiping each other out in mass; since that would mean nuclear war, which could potentially eradicate all life. The world is in a dire position, and while you or your children may not be suffering, it won't be long until life will be unbearable for everyone here but the super rich. While this is a horrible way to go about fixing the problem, it would fix the problem, and we'd just need to repeat the process every 100 years or so until we figure out a way to travel faster than light and inhabit other livable planets. Even then though, any other planet with sustainable life is going to have people already there. We'll just be spreading from planet to planet wiping out the indigenous people and why should they die so we can live, shouldn't we both just die in equal numbers?

This post was edited by jadeoshbogosh on May 1 2018 01:26pm

wut