The same side that wouldn't result in me exploding.

Rorschach

Doctor Mannhattan's side, or the "Screw you guys, I'm going to another galaxy" side.

>>1609

Me too. I was pretty much sold when he pulled a Swamp Thing, went to space and made the Mars House.

>>1573

Rorschach, because I hated nearly every single other person in that comic. Also, Ozy killed the newspaper vendor. ;_;

I spent last night reading this. It seemed like a sick mixing of misunderstood Rand objectivism, JTHM, and Justice League. I couldn't tell if it was serious or parodical.

Veidt was pathetic and insane. Rorschach was a fool, and even more insane. But Rorschach understood himself, understood that the worst in humanity was seeping over the world, shoving out the best, and recognized the influence the world had on his own self. He had his own moral code nad values by which he lived, which he understood. Veidt aspired to be nothing more than an emulation, albeit superior, of Rameses II. His world will not stay at peace.

I would have sided with Rorschach. This is not either side was right or wrong, but because Rorschach is the only one who understood the consequences of Veidts society. Jon could not have grasped it, as most human actions and consequences are beyond his understanding. Veidt was too deluded. Dan and Laurie did not care in the least.

There isn't anyone worth siding with. I think that was part of Moore's point. Everyone's fucking along on their own personal set of ideals and coming to blows whenever they conflict. A recurring theme in his works is that there are two kinds of people: those that believe the ends justify the means, and those who get crushed beneath the boot of the first kind.

can i just point out that Rorschach was a rightwing nut job who used his nihilism as an excuse to force his insanity upon other people. He hated gays but didn't care if you where a rapist. He worshiped some people regardless of their actions, and hated others no matter how much good they did. Rorschach is the worst in humanity. He is the bigot and the fool who sees himself as a savior. Rorschach didn't understand himself. He didn't understand his moral code. Rorschach's world could never exist, because you where either with him or against him. He was always right, and anybody in disagreement was a communist or possible homosexual.
not that Veidt was great. I am suspicious of anyone who believes he can decide who lives and dies. but if I was in the situation I would side with Veidt. I think he is a fool convinced of his own wisdom, but i can't think of a better way. and it worked.

The watchmen sign on at the end to Ozymandiases doomsday plan going so far as to kill Rohrschach to keep things covered up. They seem to credit him with preventing the nuclear war. They never once stop to consider the fact that Ozy WAS THE CAUSE OF THE WAR!! Don't you remember? It was the exit of Dr. manhattan that started the WW3 crisis and Dr. Manhattans exit was arranged by Ozzy. The crisis of Afghanistan (that was leading to nuclear war) was 100% the fault of 'the brilliant Ozyman' He rescued us sure but not from ourselves but from his own incompetence. They shoulda realized that and killed the fucker twice. Or gone with Rohrshach on the idea of turning him in.








-Eric

>>1690
well, maybe even with Dr. Manhattan nuclear war was inevitable. There was still a lot of tension.

but i think that veidt was just too sure that he could do things better. that's why there aren't any real heroes in this book. everyone has horrific flaws.

>>1693
Maybe but lets get one thing straight. If I provide you with a bulletproof vest and you get shot later that day it makes all the difference in the world whether i hired the shooter. it's the difference between being a farsighted friend and a villainous enemy. Maybe you would have been shot later (and protected by the bulletproof vest i gave you) maybe not. However whether or not you do does not get me off the hook for the one contract hit I did on you. I'm guilty.

>>1710

True. But that's not entirely what's going on here.
It's closer to supplying a bullet-proof vest to your friend, whilst simultaneously supplying the entire criminal element in his home area with various firearms.
Now, you're not ordering or suggesting to these elements to kill or attack your friend, but nevertheless there is a decent chance that they will do so.

This is closer to the situation.

>>1712
Right. You're deliberately increasing the chances that they will shoot your hypothetical friend to justify the giving of the BP vest. You're still guilty of conspiring against and endangering your friend. Screw Ozzy.

>>1714

Yeah, but the thing I'm trying (badly) to get across is that Ozzy probably wasn't truly aware of the consequences of his actions at the time.

Now, I'd side with Roarsach out of principle anyway, but it's not like Ozzy caused WW3, he was merely the shortsighted architecht of one of it's major contribution factors.

>>1718
Sorry but Ozzy is portrayed as one of the most brilliant people in the world. He makes and disposes of entire fortunes at will. Neither Ozymandias nor Moore can fall back on the 'I flaked' excuse.

Ozzy kills the people that work for him on purpose, and if you were to follow Rorschach you would get killed incidentally. Either way you're pretty fucked

I'll side with Rorschach. Veidt just stole his entire shtick from every Gundam series past, present, and future. I won't condone that.

>>1685
He didn't actually believe the comedian was a rapist. Throughout the book the only thing he believed in was right and wrong. If he had evidence that someone was a rapist he would fucking murder that person. The fact that he hated gays doesn't contradict this, it just says that to him homosexuality is wrong.

Rorschach

Also how do you pronounce his name?

>>1750
Walter Kovacs

>>1750
(pronounced IPA: [?o??ax])

God damn it Wikipedia...

The main thing that bothered me about Rorschach was in the essay he wrote which as a little kid at the end of one of the issues he talks about how he respects Truman for dropping the atomic bomb, but then he goes apeshit over Ozy doing something very similar(although obviously there are differences). He seemed a little contradictory.

>>1755
I think that was done on purpose to show how he changed alot after he saw those 2 dogs fighting over the little girls bones.

>>1690
>The watchmen

>>1750

Roar-Shack

>>1682
didnt get the point, it didnt have anything to do with randian objectivism it was a statement on moral objectivism versus relativism, amongst many other things

>1755

Rorschach seemed to bleed and piss American loyalty. He probably wouldn't have given two shits had Ozy attacked Moscow instead of New York.

>>1750
I assumed "Raw shark" sor "Raw shock" because of the telephone call.

>>1755
I noticed this too, and I'm still not sure what's going on. His approval of the atomic bomb does take place before the events depicted in "The Abyss Gazes Also" but the opening of the book shows him as calling President Truman a "good man."

So it seems like he carried over his approval of Truman's action from his earlier life and his transition into becoming Rorschach.

Like coke in green glass bottles

>>1767

He's actually named after the Rorschach test (Which is what his mask is), which is pronounced like

>>1763

THE SIDE OF THE FRIENDZONE'D

If you believe that killing half the amount of people that die in any significant conventional war, combined with a hoax that reeks bullshit from every pore, is all that's necessary to steer humanity towards SUNSHINE FLOWER PETALS RAINBOWS PUPPIES, you don't get to call yourself the smartest man in the world. Rorschach was a sociopathic prick, but he didn't pretend anything else.

>>1778
But, he one, for the most part.
Except for his act of making Jon drunk and subsequently preventing Jon from saving humanity.

>>1780
er, "won"

>>1781
sympathetic TV bulletins 30 seconds... er, 35 minutes and 30 seconds later do not equal everlasting peace and harmony.

>>1685 [Rorschach] hated gays
wat

>>1685 didn't care if you were a rapist
double wat

you get into the horshack character from the getgo. he is all antihero and wutnot but then manhattan pulls a "fuck you bitch im going to space" and you realize he tha man

>>1801
>wat
you dont remember him constantly bitching about commies, liberals and homosexuals? and mentioning very unapprovingly that someone (was it veidt? its been a while) may have been gay and that he was gonna find out?

>>double wat
he wasnt exactly seething when the comedian tried to rape that chick (fuck, forgot her name too, lauries mom). and he knew about all the other fucked up shit the comedian did and it seemed to me like he didnt give a fuck. but like i said, its been a while, maybe ill blow the dust off and crack these back open tomorrow.

>>1808
Well The Comedian represented America and everything.

despite the fact that he was batshit insane, i'd go with rorschach. well i guess the same could be said of veidt. but still, i liked his style, i guess. ozymandias is a pompous fuck, and rorschach is no-bullshit asskicking motherfucker. also he has a cooler costume.

>>1808 he wasnt exactly seething when the comedian tried to rape that chick
Wasn't that still when he was in his "Walter Kovaks pretending to be Rorschach" phase?

>you dont remember him constantly bitching about homosexuals?
Not really, no. Also, the "possibly homosexual?" line Doesn't strike me as particularly hateful.

>>1789
The whole "Borsch and Burgers"/"they're our best friends now" was what I was referring to.

Veidt did bring peace to the world. The "Burger and Bor..." line at the New Frontiersman at the end confirms this.

Rorschach was a homophobe and extreme republican. He accused Veidt of being gay, called the rape a "moral lapse," and almost beat up a lady near the end for accusing him of sexual advances.

Rorschach = not fun.

Veidt's a dick, but he did what was right.

Having said all that, as I've grown older I've come to respect the Comedian more and more. (Rape is still wrong), but the guy had the only logical response the the situation.

rorschach

Nite Owl because he got the hot girl even though he was a fat fanboy. There's hope for us all, people!

Veidt was a fool. Everyone knows that. And he didn't really win, because the New Frontiersman got Rorschach's diary at the end, so all the cover up would be revealed.

But i'm sick of this whole "Rorschach knew right from wrong and lived by a moral code" bullshit. Rorschach was insane. First off, the "rape was a moral lapse" took place after he truly became Rorschach. Everything in the comic did. And second, Rorschach didn't give a shit about right or wrong. You where with him or against him. Remember his talk about how great his father was? He had never met his father. He didn't care if his father was a horrible person, because his idea of his father was more powerful. He has notions of what people are, and your actions don't really matter. That's why it was okay for the comedian to rape or truman to drop the bomb, but it wasn't okay for anyone else to rape or Veidt to destroy new york. That's why his response to crime was always way out of control. He would cripple you for painting on a wall. Cause if you where not with him, you where against him. And if you where against him, you deserved whatever you got coming

>>1846

The New Frontierman was about as respected in the Watchmen world as The Sun is in ours so I expect their exposé of Veid's plan to be as well received as any UFO sightings you see on the cover of a supermarket tabloid.

>>1685
Didn't care if you were a rapist, eh? Like the scene where he goes out to stop crime, and the first person he sees is a rapist, and he talks about the look in their eyes before he kills them? Rorschach's side. Veidt is a pansy boy.

>>1846

i dont think you could judge him for every word, the "moral lapse" thing might have just slipped his mouth since he isnt really that good at talking, also that whole rape situation was pretty confusing, it happend before Rorschach was active and they even got together after it so Rorschach might have made wrong conclusions.

>>1833 almost beat up a lady near the end for accusing him of sexual advances.
Everyone should totally just laugh off slander because it's never hurt anyone, amirite?

Also, quit calling Rorschach a homophobe when all you have to back it up with is "boo hoo he questioned Oxycontin's sexuality ;_;"

>>1865

What are we, 5 years old? If a woman accuses you of slander, you don't go beat her up. If it wasn't for the kid, who knows what would have happened.

Oh, and die hard right wingers are just so well known for their gay sympathy, right? Why would he need to investigate if Ozymandias was gay? How would that help crime fighting... unless Rorschach somehow thought being gay was a crime?

Rorschach is and always has been in his own world. How else can you explain how he has no problem putting a harpoon through a cop's chest who was trying to arrest him? Simply put, even though Rorschach is all about order, law, & fascism... the cop was not on Rorschach's side, and therefore in the wrong.

>>1869
Rorscach was anticommunist in a world where the cold war not only didnt end but lasted so long that the general populace began to feel that the end was always nigh... half of the minutemen were under investigation by the House Un-American Activities Committee meaning McCarthyism is still something of a virtue meaning GAY IS UNAMERICAN

Rorschach was probably a closet fag from all of the hatred women had towards him throughout his life.

He just wanted to suck Ozy's beautiful cock.

>>1882
so, he had bitten 40 cocks and thats terrible.

NO dumdum, he simply wasnt interesed. He had a job to do and hed be damned if a bitch got in his way.

Rorschach's side: kill people who go against your wacky moral code.
Veidt's side: lie to and kill innocent people to get them to do what you want.
both are assholes but I'll go with Rorschach

>>1885

wat

Personally I took Rorschach's "possibly homosexual" comment as a joke. He was questioning his sexuality out of spite.

tl;dr you missed the joke.

>>1755
>>1846

Rorschach actually starts to take steps back towards humanity after the retrieval of his old costume - see his interactions w/Dan regarding their friendship and his display of emotion in his last meeting w/Jon. He's still essentially a nutcase, though.

>>1833

I'd probably end up like the Comedian, too. In terms of his philosophy and demise.

>>1921
The comedian roasted people alive and yet the idea of 20 million dead is somehow too much for him.

>>1936
uh... yeah.
is that supposed to be shocking?
roasting dozens of people who are ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY SIMULTANEOUSLY TRYING TO KILL YOU (with the exception of his Vietnamese lover) is not the same thing as horribly mindraping half of the most important city in the world to death.

Wow, I am actually a little sad from all the stupidity here.

Can there be any doubt about Ozymandias? Do you think that peace, or at least a cease-fire can be achieved by holding hands and singing a heart-warming song around a campfire? I think you do..

SRSLY GUISE, Ozy had to pull of his crazy stunt. If he knew that the world COULD erupt in WW3, and he knew that he could deceive the people into getting a different common enemy... then it's not really a choice.

Think about what history has taught us. How did Hitler unite Germany? He blamed all of its problems on two different peoples. The French and the Jews. And so, instead of having a whole bunch of hatred floating around, not doing anything constructive, but hurting the country- he managed to channel that hatred into something positive- positive for Germany, I hasten to add, but POSITIVE NONETHELESS.

Whereas Rorschach represents the kind of blind stubbornness that people mistake for 'strength of character.' It isn't strength. It's inflexibility, and refusal to look at the world with realistic eyes. Rors was a great tactician, sure. He was able to react more than adequately to events as they unfolded. But Ozy is a brilliant strategist. He was able to thwart WW3. Sure, he had to kill a lot of people. But so what? They would've died during the conflict anyway.

>>1945
I would absolutely be on Ozymandias' side if I were certain that it would actually work. However, throughout the story hints are given out that he may not be entirely as perfect as most assume, from when he corrects Rorschach when he calls him the world's smartest man to when he desperately asks Dr. Manhattan for confirmation that he did the right thing. Think about it- if the events in the story took place, would your first thought be OH GEE ALIENS I GUESS I SUDDENLY LIKE THE RUSSIANS?

>>1944
He had to have also seen WW3 coming, and that would have surely been a much more grotesque slaughter?

>>1948

Well, actually, for me it'd be OMG ALIENS, I SUDDENLY LIKE THE AMERIKANTSY!!!

No, but seriously, if I was a dude in power, I'd be like "OH SHI- ALIENS!!! KILL THEM!" because we're xenophobic. The vast majority. And that's actually the source of most tensions between different peoples- the fact that we're different. But suddenly something FAR more different comes at you. It's more likely than not that you and your former enemy will ally against this threat. Think about it. If two guys are fighting, and suddenly they're surrounded by wolves, they'll turn against the wolves first.

>>1949
Sure, I'm just saying that the point that
>>1936
was trying to make is a bit silly.

>>1950
sure, but then once the wolves are gone they aren't BEST FRIENDS 4EVER- all Ozymandias did was delay the inevitable. a better analogy for "Watchmen" would be that two lifelong enemies are fighting when suddenly a wolf runs up, bites one on the hand, and runs away. And it's actually just some guy in a cardboard wolf suit.

>>1945

>He was able to thwart WW3
More like he just postponed it a bit. You can see the writing on the wall in the epilogue and in Jon's final words to Ozzy.

Since Ozzy already did the deed when he revealed his plans, I'd say any rational person would be pretty much forced to go along with him. The trickier question would be if you would have supported his plan prior to the button-pushing.

So, I'm not sure which case is being asked here.

From a pure numbers standpoint, Ozzy's actions seem preferable to nuclear war. But you gotta wonder to what lengths he'll have to go to maintain the "alien threat" once the initial warm fuzzies of global cooperation vs space squiddies wears off.

>>1953

Okay, so then you get to kill a furry.

This is bad how? Either way, Ozzy manages to avoid global conflict, by killing what, 200 people? At most, 200. Sometimes, you just have to look at the numbers.

>>2006
try 3 million

>>2018

3 mil versus a few billion still isn't that hard a choice though.

What I don't get is why he didn't teleport it to Moscow in stead of a U.S. city. Sure the casualties would've been a little lower but the impact would've been just as great.

>>2019
But Ozy set it up for that. The Russians wouldnt have invaded Afghanistan if it had not been for him, Dr. Manhattan wouldve still been there. There would have been no need for death at all. Sure there would still be animosity and distrust between the superpowers, but nobody would have died because of it.

>>1882
Rorschach isn't gay, he's unable to accept sex in an adult manner because of his childhood and the fact that me may be mentally handicapped. Rorschach stated that he didn't believe the rape even happened and only used the "moral lapse" excuse when Silk Spectre pressed the issue. His mom was a whore, his landlady was a whore. He was a misogynist. I loved Rorschach because he is the character that directly imports the black and white view of morality one often sees in comic books into a more realistic setting and he is obviously not mentally stable.

The only reason the other characters supported Ozy was because it had already happened and they wanted to pull something positive out of situation.

I side with Rorschach, because i think he's right, and I love his mask

I'd side with whichever side was willing to pay.

Though for Ozy it'd be money... for Rorschach he'd just have to show me how to make a mask.


>>2028

While I agree he is very inconsistent in his behavior and seems to have a very simplified view of the world, I am not certain he is actually mentally handicapped.

While he was still sane, the Night Owl described him as a brilliant detective. He also obviously plans his battles several steps ahead, as we see with the battle with "the Big Show."

I think another major reason he acts the way he does now is indeed in part due to his history with women, and his terribly abusive child hood. But he did not seem to to really have too much of a problem with women untill the stresses of the crimes he had seen had finally broken his ego and made him into Rorschach as apposed to Kovaks in a costume.

His beliefs are inconsistent and simply because he refuses to look examine them any farther than on the surface. Having the belief makes him feel normal, and if he were to admit to himself how underdevloped and possibly wrong they were, it would make him lose contact with himself, and he is all that he has left.

At the end I thought Rorschach had it right. Sure, a utopia was created, but they had no right to take the lives they did to make it. I can still see the frame with him yelling right before he's killed in my mind, actually, one of the few frames of any comic that stuck in my head.

>>2049
When I bring up the possibility of being a bit stunted I'm referring to his backstory. The dialog involving his mother and around the time he blinds the older kid bring this into question. There isn't enough information; he's obviously emotionally retarded, and an intelligent person, but the possibility of an inborn mental problem is possible.

When he was working to make a dress for Kitty Genovese (another horribly sad story), Kovacs was uncomfortable handling women's clothing. He felt dirty. He hadn't gone as far over the edge as he ends up, but even before Rorschach was "born", women and sexuality made him uncomfortable.

He sees the world as simple; it's a rotting disgusting pustule and it contaminates everything it touches. He respects people who can see it and take steps to fix it. But he isn't introspective in the slightest. He faces the evils without and ignores those within, maybe he's afraid of what he'd find. When Rorschach dies, he screams at Dr Manhattan, challenging this godlike being to kill him. It's almost as if he knows that if he sacrifices his morals even once then he is no longer justified, but if he stays true to these same morals then countless innocents died for nothing.

>>2049
>>2054
>>2058

;_;

Eh, depends. I'd try to stop Ozy's plan because it seems full of holes, but if I failed to do that or only learned about it after it was already done, I'd try to help make it work. So I'd be the same as Dan and Laurie, they made the choice that most "normal" people would make.

>>2094
seconded. It's not a good plan, but every alternative would mean all of those deaths were for nothing.

I'm on the good doctor's side.

Ozy had the guts to do the right thing.

I think we're forgetting the fact that Veidt would be exposed shortly after if you take what the ending implied. Did he ever think what would happen then?

Rorshach. Because I've never felt sympathy OR empathy to a right-wing misogynist crackpot like I did with Rory. I wanted to hug the beautiful, miserable bastard.
Veidt was an insufferable prick, and he lost me completely when he let his dumbass secretary get shot in the staged assassination attempt.

Also, this:

"None of you understand. I'm not locked up in here with you. You're locked up in here with me."

I'd be more for stopping Ozy than helping RAWR-shock

Rorschach. As fucked up as he is, he isn't a hypocritical pretender like Ozzy. Nite Owl and Spectre sucked at the end for selling out and being all lovey-dovey as though they weren't partially responsible for the deaths of 3 million people. That, and those shitty Millenium ads made me think that Ozzy's utopia consisted of the same shitty faux-Egypt fantasy world he desired, if that even held up at all.

Not even in the face of Armageddon.

Never compromise.

1. Rorschach was obviously a homophobe, a hater of communists, an indoctrinated nationalist, and hanging off the faaaar edge of right wing extremist thought. Anyone who thinks otherwise needs to read the words rather than just look at the pretty pictures.

2. Rorschach's political and moral views should have no bearing whatsoever when it comes down to whose side you would have taken at the end of the story. It's not a popularity contest about who you like more. It's an all-or-nothing decision with the lives of millions in the balance either way. I'm about as far left as you can get politically, but saying Rorschach's choice in this instance was wrong because "he's a republican lol" is fucking retarded.

3. The main difference between the nuking of Japan and the *******ing of New York, in my mind, was what went on behind the scenes. With Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we knew who dropped the bombs, we knew where they dropped them, and we knew why. We didn't hide it or pretend it was anything that it wasn't. Ozy, however, would publicly accept no responsibility for what he did. It was carried out in secret and the truth of the matter would never be known. It's not the deaths of so many that get Rorschach riled, I don't think, but the immorality of Ozy's duplicity and scheming.

If nothing else, Rorschach hated communists and gays because he felt their being such was a crime, or at least an affront to deceny (whether or not we would agree). Ozy knew he would be killing at least some people who were wholly innocent, allegedly for the greater good. Rorschach was hateful, prejudiced, and narrow-minded, but he lived only to pass judgement on evildoers, not sacrifice some innocents for the good of more innocents.

>>2356 Rorschach was obviously a homophobe
Yeah really, he said Oxyclean was GAY. Calling people homosexual is so homophobic! >:(

>>2359

if there are only two dots to connect, there's really no excuse for not doing so correctly.

Add up every other view he has. Now, take into consideration that in his notes to self he says he should actively seek out information concerning Ozy's homosexuality.

I can't imagine that every other note to self deals with rooting out sin, vice, and evil, but he wants to prove Ozy's obvious gayness for sheer personal curiosity fulfillment.

But then, I suppose it could also make perfectly good sense for a right wing nationalist with extremely strong traditionalist views on family, country and morality to secretly ferret out the sexual preferences of his colleagues for the express purpose of gossiping about it with the office ladies at the water cooler. In fact, that seems so likely I think I'll just go ahead and retract my earlier assertions entirely.

>>2356

Maybe I missed something when I read the comic, but while he was clearly homophobic/right-wing/probably sexist kinda guy, he didn't walk around killing or hurting people he thought were gay/left-wing/slutty. He commented on Laurie's outfit, thought her mom was a whore, but he didn't refuse to work with her or try to attack either of them.

So like I was saying, unless I missed the part where he was going after other people just for the mere fact of having a different opinion than himself, I don't see how anyone can label him as the wrong-doer because of his views. He limited his violent tendencies towards criminals (or in some cases the pinkies of men who might lead him to the criminals).

tl;dr
Ozy can suck a dick.

>>2356
>>1728
>>1833
>>1815
>>1919
>>2359

Rorschach probably was gay himself. After Dan breaks him out of jail he acts very differently from his usual grizzled self, goes out of his way to tell Dan what a great friend he was to him and Dan has to visibly remind Rorschach that he was still shaking his hand to get him to let go.

Moore put all that in for a reason.

>>2382

I saw all that as a slow return to humanity for Rorschach. Nothing sexual behind it. And him removing his mask at the end -- that was a final cry of desperation and despair from Kovacs, not Rorschach.

The only evidence I see that supports Rorschach being a homophobe is when he questions Ozymandias' sexuality. And I always thought Moore was putting that in as a joke, a kind of comic relief.

>>2227
This.

The reason I hate Ozy, and why I feel most people do, is because he believes himself to be perfect. He's this handsome, athletic genius that owns a hugely successful company. But that wasn't it, it was the fact that he believed he alone could create a perfect world. History's shown time and time again that one man's vision a perfect world does not make. Douchebag.

>>2227

Yeah, considering all of his traits, some of the most least desirable I can think of in a person, I was actually upset when Dr. Manhattan had his way with him.

That's some good writing by Moore.

>>2427
The fact that he believed his society will workout in the end while everyone else's has failed thus far is part of the reason I really hated his character at the end.

Rorschach. In this post coldwar era, we know that communism can be dealt with through economic means , thus meaning his plan void of any purpose.

Is it bright were you are?

Rorschach

RORSCHACH DIES AT THE END OF WATCHMEN.RORSCHACH DIES AT THE END OF WATCHMEN.RORSCHACH DIES AT THE END OF WATCHMEN.RORSCHACH DIES AT THE END OF WATCHMEN.RORSCHACH DIES AT THRORSCHACH DIES AT THE END OF WATCHMEN.RORSCHACH DIES AT THE END OF WATCHMEN.RORSCHACH DIES AT THE END OF WATCHMEN.RORSCHACH DIES AT THE END OF WATCHMEN.RORSCHACH DIES AT THE END OF WATCHMEN.RORSCHACH DIES AT THE END OF WATCHMEN.RORSCHACH DIES AT THE END OF WATCHMEN.RORSCHACH DIES AT THE END OF WATCHMEN.RORSCHACH DIES AT THE END OF WATCHMEN.

>>1953 And it's actually just some guy in a cardboard wolf suit.

wait... yes I would stop fighting to kill a furry

Personally I think Rorschach was acting retarded in the end. (or batshit crazy, but I'd like to think he had a grain of sanity left)
Still Ozy is a faggot, weeabooing egypt.

He's not bashit. He knows the scheme will work, but his own sense of justice won't allow him to accept it. He wants to save the world, can't, and cannot accept the way it's being saved. He's also sick of humanity and had been looking to die for a long while.

His reaction makes perfect sense... if you're Rorschach.

>>3015
uh, we read it.

You're not really spoiling anything.

i'd be on Paul Revere's side

OZY LIED
PEOPLE DIED

>>1945

But here's the thing: There was absolutely no threat of a WWIII occurring as long as the yanks had Dr. Manhattan. By making him exile himself, Ozy CREATED the threat to begin with.

He then goes on to murder millions of innocents in a most horrific fashion to undo his own mess.

But he didn't undo his mess. If you pay attention to the news reports at the end, they're talking about the alien again.

Words to the effect of:

"No, at this point it no longer looks like an attack, but rather a freak accident. Like a bee stinging on instinct when it dies."

WHOOPS Looks like the world won't be united after all.

And even if his plan worked flawlessly, it was a temporary solution at best. What happens years down the road when no more aliens show up?

We'll go right back to our petty squabbling. Manhattan alludes as much before he leaves. Nothing ever ends.

And killing Blake: He didn't need to. At the end, he didn't even consider killing the other 'heroes' (Not even Rorschach) and they were in the exact same position as Blake was. It was absolutely clear to him that Blake would tell no-body.

But Blake was the only person to ever beat him in a fight, and that egomaniac was still sore over it. So he murdered him, and used his plot as a justification.

So this ego-driven pointless murder, leads to an investigation, which of course, Rorschach records in his journal, which is now in the hands of the New Frontiersman.

Veidt was an egomaniac who drove the world to the brink of nuclear annihilation, and murdered millions of innocents just so he could be like his hero, Alexander, and build his own little utopia.

FUCK Veidt.

And are the people changed?

>>3249

Does it make you happy?

http://thepiratebay.org/details.php?id=3328482

^Torrent for the full comic... it's fast as hell too I was pushing 470kb/s at times.

Our good Ramses-licker.

Social Darwinism is downright sexy.

Rorschach

>>1690
That was kind of the point though, Ozy does those horrible things and yet his plan miraculously works. The Soviet Union and the USA reconcile with each other and the world finds itself in a considerably better position than it was before.
The only problem I have with Ozy is that he keeps on insisting that the wisdom of the "old pharaohs" is what saves the world and is the best type of knowledge. If it is the best type of knowledge then I don't know why it's not around anymore.

>>No, at this point it no longer looks like an attack, but rather a freak accident. Like a bee stinging on instinct when it dies

i cant find that. what page does it say that?

bumb

>>3246
i think he killed Blake because Blake worked for the Government and would've ratted him out more than a personal grudge.

>>3370

Right after manhattan kills rorschach, he walks through the TV room again