Is it time for Frank Castle to punish Iraq instead of Nam?

[Optimus_Prime_]

Originally Posted by Anubis

He was always in his 50's, he was just in a younger body. Same way Cap is in his 80's. Take a look at those pages up top. He don't look 50 to me.

Plus Ennis even referenced it in his Welcome Back Frank opening.

Cap has the benefit of being asleep for an ever stretching amount of time.

[Aesculapius]

So, just make The Punisher into a ageless war hero like Cap? Write it off as being injected with a serum like Cap. That would be easy enough to buy.

Age in Marvel is a thing of suspended disbelief. Most of the main characters should be older than dirt at this point. I guess when you have an origin associated with a particular historical event it becomes a bit trickier to disguise, though.

[ObakeTora]

Originally Posted by chamber-music

Isn't that Burt Kenyon aka Hitman the villain version of the punisher?

http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix/cruzcarl.htm

I think Rucka isn't aware of him, he wasn't aware of Frank's first encounter with BlackWidow in PWJ #9 when I tweeted him the information.

Originally Posted by RuckaWriter#

Greg Rucka ‏@ruckawriter
@TheGhost119 ah, thanks! Wasn’t aware of the story, sadly. My bad.

They should bring Cruz back and let him be the generation that was shaped by the Middle East conflict. Each war generation deserves their own iconic character, not someone borrowed and replaced as (to me) that disrespects every man and woman who risked and gave their life in those respected wars. Either resurrect Cruz or invent a new character. Cap will always be the WW2 who fought Nazis, and Frank will always be the Vietnam legend who fought communists.

[ObakeTora]

Btw, now that he is in the Thunderbolts, I really hope he jacks Flash Thompson's symbiote costume so we see can see the return of....




This could be a serious Marvel event. Imagine all the c-listers being sent to the beyond in one issue.

[Optimus_Prime_]

Originally Posted by Aesculapius

So, just make The Punisher into a ageless war hero like Cap? Write it off as being injected with a serum like Cap. That would be easy enough to buy.

Age in Marvel is a thing of suspended disbelief. Most of the main characters should be older than dirt at this point. I guess when you have an origin associated with a particular historical event it becomes a bit trickier to disguise, though.

That's the rub though.

Sure Beast makes mention of Ed Sullivan. Scott and Jean meet Jack Kirby. But it's not as essential to their story as Punisher Nam. Although that's also because of series popularity too. Punisher isn't exactly a C-lister either.

Eventually I think I'm all for it. I think they should do a "test the waters" miniseries beforehand just to see how an alternate take is received.

[Anubis]

But they don't need to cuz it's already been explained why he's so young and fought in Nam. It would just be a pointless retconn, like most retconns.

Originally Posted by Optimus_Prime_

Cap has the benefit of being asleep for an ever stretching amount of time.

And Castle has the benefit of having died a few times and coming back thanks to mystical shenanigans.

[Baramos]

If I had my druthers I would have had it be in Bosnia, not Middle East.

[chamber-music]

Originally Posted by Aesculapius

Age in Marvel is a thing of suspended disbelief. Most of the main characters should be older than dirt at this point. I guess when you have an origin associated with a particular historical event it becomes a bit trickier to disguise, though.

Reed Richards was a world war 2 veteran and Charles Xavier is supposed to be Korean War veterans as well.

I think your right that we should suspended disbelief. Its not worth Marvel updating each characters background to match a more recnt conflict every decade or so.

[StreetWarrior]

Absolutely not. Viet Nam is what shaped the Punisher and gave birth to the level of brutality and darkness in which the character thrives. Without trying to offend anyone, our wars in the Middle-East are/were not as serious as the depravities and horrors experienced by soldiers in the Viet Nam "conflict". You can't really compare Jarhead to Apocalypse Now or Platoon. The wars are apples and oranges.

Additionally, being a Viet Nam vet may age the character but it's essential to granting the character the experience and wisdom to combat threats that are, for all intents and purposes, outside of his league.

Could a 25 year old veteran of Afghanistan with 5 years of combat experience go head to head with Daredevil? Probably not.

Could a 50 year old veteran od Viet Nam with 25 years of combat experience give Daredevil a run for his money? The odds are better.

Thus, the character NEEDS the decades of combat experience to maintain his threat level in the Marvel Universe.

[shiva666]

everlasting series are crap... That said with all the time travel, god like beings and multiple realities you can do pretty much whatever and say it is still within context.

for one thing, marvels nam could/should be riddled with super beings just like everything else, making it even edgier.

[CaptainStacy]

Originally Posted by Optimus_Prime_

It's long accepted in Frank's canon that he was scarred due to his involvement in the horrendous Vietnam War. It's considered one of the main aspects of his character.

But let's face it Iraq and Afghanistan really sucked too, especially as they escalated.

Is it time Marvel Now canonically updates this? Or are they planning to? It seems obvious to me. Vietnam is getting too long ago.

Why have a specific war/conflict at all? In the end, does it really matter?

Just have him be an ex marine who served his country overseas, and he can move easily along with the "sliding timeline" that is the Marvel universe.

[Optimus_Prime_]

Originally Posted by CaptainStacy

Why have a specific war/conflict at all? In the end, does it really matter?

Just have him be an ex marine who served his country overseas, and he can move easily along with the "sliding timeline" that is the Marvel universe.

This may be the best way to do this.

[Scourge2099]

Originally Posted by CaptainStacy

Why have a specific war/conflict at all? In the end, does it really matter?

Just have him be an ex marine who served his country overseas, and he can move easily along with the "sliding timeline" that is the Marvel universe.

Or just have Frank get injected with the Infinity Formula. He can still have his Nam origin.

[hippie_hunter]

Infinity Formula works.

[Shockdingo]

Mark me down for a supporter of the Infinity formula. It still keeps Frank the "normal guy" of the MU without giving him too much of a boos that the super soldier serum would give.

[fat freddys cat]

I think for the MU 616 punisher yes having served in the middle east in the early 90's suits the character better he is a more street level reality based character. The most so in the MU I think, So super serums etc don't work for me (sorry FRANKENCASTLE lovers )

The MAX Punisher will always be Nam based so as fans we will always have that....

And if u think for one minute that War and fighting it changes from war to war that's pure **** when your getting shot at by an AK 47 in a jungle in the 60's or a desert in the 90's it's still war it's still combat and it still ****s u up......

[Donnie Darko]

Kin of off topic, but it's weird how Marvel allows some characters to age, but seems to fear it with others. For example, Cyclopd and Spider-Man should probably be the same age, but while I feel like Cyclops is presented as being in his mid-30s or around that, Peter Parker was never allowed to age out of his 20s.

[hippie_hunter]

Originally Posted by fat freddys cat

I think for the MU 616 punisher yes having served in the middle east in the early 90's suits the character better he is a more street level reality based character. The most so in the MU I think, So super serums etc don't work for me (sorry FRANKENCASTLE lovers )

The MAX Punisher will always be Nam based so as fans we will always have that....

And if u think for one minute that War and fighting it changes from war to war that's pure **** when your getting shot at by an AK 47 in a jungle in the 60's or a desert in the 90's it's still war it's still combat and it still ****s u up......

Except it is quite different. Very different.

In Vietnam, soldiers had to deal with not knowing who the enemy is, being ambushed by the enemy, were in a far more combative state, the United States was the aggressive power and the sides were morally grey, tens of thousands of American solders died, and there was no end in sight for the war.

With Iraq on the other hand, there were relatively few casualties, the United States was a liberating power and there was a clear bad guy (Saddam Hussein), the Iraqis were easily defeated and they weren't ambushing American soldiers, most troops didn't even see any combat, and American tanks essentially just rolled in, liberated Kuwait as heroes, and went straight back home.

To sum it all up: BIG ****ING DIFFERENCE! The Persian Gulf War in the 90's just wouldn't give Frank the trauma that Vietnam created. Being ambushed by the Viet Cong is vastly different than rolling up in a tank to the Iraqis surrendering with barely a fight. Not knowing who your enemy is in Vietnam is vastly different than being greeted as a liberator for freeing a conquered nation. Not knowing if you're going to make it back home is vastly different than being bored in a base in Saudi Arabia. And yes, war does change. The ways to fight a war change all the time and it's constantly evolving. Combat tactics have changed, fighting styles have changed, the missions have changed. Everything has changed. If war didn't change, we'd still be lining up in straight lines like we did back in the Revolutionary War.

And honestly, it would make more sense to update the origins of the more realistic MAX Punisher as opposed to the 616 Punisher who lives in a world filled with gods, magicians, demons, mutants, aliens, etc. The 616 Punisher does not live in a realistic world, therefore it would make more sense to have him deal with unrealistic situations because that's the world he lives in. It just doesn't make any sense to put the realism filters on just one character in a universe that isn't realistic to begin with. Even Greg Rucka acknowledges that in his run on the Punisher.

[fat freddys cat]

BIG ****ING DIFFERENCE!

No. I complete disagree hippy hunter your talking about the semantics of each war am talking about actual act of combat , it can still mess people up , I live in a country where I have seen this many MANY times .


The big ****ing difference here is that u did not understand my original post .


Then again that's not really that suprising when reading your posts......

[hippie_hunter]

Originally Posted by fat freddys cat

No. I complete disagree hippy hunter your talking about the semantics of each war am talking about actual act of combat , it can still mess people up , I live in a country where I have seen this many MANY times .


The big ****ing difference here is that u did not understand my original post .


Then again that's not really that suprising when reading your posts......

I did understand your original post. Still doesn't change the fact that combat in Vietnam was vastly different than combat in 1990's Iraq. It's not semantics surrounding the situations of the war. It's the fact that combat changes constantly. You see, the military was very careful to ensure that the mistakes made in Vietnam didn't happen in Iraq in the 1990's (which baffles me as to why they made them in the second war in Iraq). The combat that American forces faced in Iraq was minimal and done with an absurd amount of ease. The amount of casualties American troops dealt with in combat amounted to slightly over 100. More people died by accident in the Persian Gulf War than in combat.

It's a big difference in combat when you're not seeing the people around you die. It's a big difference when the enemy is surrendering with minimal resistance. It's a big difference when you're essentially just waltzing right into enemy territory no problem as opposed to being hunkered down facing heavy gunfire. It's a big difference when the people treat you as a liberator as opposed to not being able to trust them out of fear of being attacked. If someone gets ****ed up in the head from combat in the Persian Gulf War, it's more likely they're naturally ****ed up in the head right from the get go as opposed to being genuinely traumatized.

There just isn't enough trauma in the Persian Gulf War to create a monster like the Punisher. For someone who is clamoring for realism surrounding the Punisher, then you have to take into account the reality that Frank would have more likely been in a situation like Jarhead as opposed to Full Metal Jacket, Apocalypse Now, and Platoon. There's nothing compelling there at all and just makes the Punisher a weaker character.

[StreetWarrior]

Originally Posted by hippie_hunter

I did understand your original post. Still doesn't change the fact that combat in Vietnam was vastly different than combat in 1990's Iraq. It's not semantics surrounding the situations of the war. It's the fact that combat changes constantly. You see, the military was very careful to ensure that the mistakes made in Vietnam didn't happen in Iraq in the 1990's (which baffles me as to why they made them in the second war in Iraq). The combat that American forces faced in Iraq was minimal and done with an absurd amount of ease. The amount of casualties American troops dealt with in combat amounted to slightly over 100. More people died by accident in the Persian Gulf War than in combat.

It's a big difference in combat when you're not seeing the people around you die. It's a big difference when the enemy is surrendering with minimal resistance. It's a big difference when you're essentially just waltzing right into enemy territory no problem as opposed to being hunkered down facing heavy gunfire. It's a big difference when the people treat you as a liberator as opposed to not being able to trust them out of fear of being attacked. If someone gets ****ed up in the head from combat in the Persian Gulf War, it's more likely they're naturally ****ed up in the head right from the get go as opposed to being genuinely traumatized.

There just isn't enough trauma in the Persian Gulf War to create a monster like the Punisher. For someone who is clamoring for realism surrounding the Punisher, then you have to take into account the reality that Frank would have more likely been in a situation like Jarhead as opposed to Full Metal Jacket, Apocalypse Now, and Platoon. There's nothing compelling there at all and just makes the Punisher a weaker character.

I agree 100%. Not to insult any Iraq war vets, but Vietnam was a much darker and nastier war...

[cthulhu]

I totally agree too, Vietnam is integral to the Punisher's origin. No other conflict has the cultural significance of Nam, the last conflict that its portrayal in the media wasn't dictated by the governments. It was cynical, dark and the American soldiers were resented by their own citizens for their actions when it wasn't the soldiers faults it was the top brass who made the poor decisions. I live in Northern Ireland and there has been a conflict that lasted here for 30+ years, it’s not the same as Nam. The jungle warfare of Nam was perfect conditions for guerrilla combat. Other things like PTSD not being recognized as a real disorder until more recently, the very masculine nature of the war and the very ambiguous motives for being in the war all inform on the Punishers character, the fact that Frank chose to return for at least two more tours tells you a lot about him. Vietnam is the total opposite to the WW2 there it was pretty clear that the Nazi's were the bad guys. With the gulf wars it was pretty clear too from what you see on the telly but Nam it was a morally ambiguous war of attrition. Generation Kill makes a good point: people who joined up even as recently as the original gulf war wanted to go and kill, the first gulf war was there this first was noticed. Kids now are exposed to murder death and sadism in games, movies and TV all the time now and want to kill themselves, there are desensitised. This still wasn't the case in Nam at the time so the effects on the soldiers was more traumatic as the combat was so alien to them. I understand some may feel this is an issue in that it ages the character (its a big issue for my brother) personally it doesn't matter to me as as has been mentioned before there have now been two attempts to de-age the character if you need an explanation (neither work well). Hey comics are made up anyway and Punisher fights Thor next issue!

[cthulhu]

Just speaking of Nazi's - does it bother anyone else that the Punisher is wearing a red skull in Thunderbolts? Isn't there a Nazi character that goes by that moniker? FFS!

[StreetWarrior]

Originally Posted by cthulhu

Just speaking of Nazi's - does it bother anyone else that the Punisher is wearing a red skull in Thunderbolts? Isn't there a Nazi character that goes by that moniker? FFS!

I was bothered a little bit by it too. Not purely because of the imagry but because it seemed a little out of character. Teams are really not Frank's thing. I'll suspend disbelief that he would join a supergroup but I have a hard time believing he'd be for "team" colors/symbols/matching outfits of sorts, etc. I'm hoping he (and Venom especially) go back to white instead of red...

[WOLVERINE25TH]

The way they handled his team playing on Marvel Knights was pretty good. Shame that book didn't last longer.