DC Comics: At their prime, Batman is a better vigilante than Green Arrow PART II

Once again I apologize for the forfeit of the last two rounds of the first part of this debate. My opponent has been kind enough to let the fun continue with a Part two debate that simply will begin where the last one left off.The first part of this debate can be found hear and if your going to vote on this one you must first read this debate all the way through (of course set aside the forfeit rules for your votes on this Part two debate unless I forfeit in Part two) http://www.debate.org...So the last thing left off was my need to give a response to the cross examination round.Now just to be weird and to try it, I"m going to mix up my own cross examination questions with answering my opponents questions. It will make sense once I do it"Con"s 1st question: Who wins a war faster or better, a perfect soldier, or a great General?You might be asking "what"s that got to do with any of this?" well just ponder that question for now while I address some of your questions and Ill get back to this one.Pro"s Q: What did I define vigilante as in the 2nd round?Con A: Taking the law into their own hands. And to quickly answer the follow ups in order: Out of Context, Semantics, Yes, and Yes.Look I"ve already connected the dots for you as to how his public life affects and helps his alter ego life. And no amount of semantic retreat to pointing out the wording of the definitions in round 2 is going to nullify my point because it fits fine within the definition. In fact being the Mayor is probably a better fit for your specific definition of vigilante than anything else since it"s the very definition of taking the law into your own hands when you become the law.The book about jobs was to illustrate a point from an example of a real life topic about the connectedness of seemingly separate careers in our life. Can working at a convenience store give me skills ill use one day teaching? Yes. By the same extension, can being the Mayor of the City that your vigilante of give you benefits that aid the vigilante job? Ultra Yes!Keep pondering about that question I gave while I press on to your next onePro"s Q: How does being married help you take the law in your own hands?Con"s A: Prevents early burnout = longer vigilante career = better amount of vigilante-ing done. And to the follow ups: No not will but emotional stamina, I find I have more incentive when I don"t hate my life, the same way having a second mule helps the first haul a wagon, to the degree batman does Yes, when you have half the time you used to have available to fight crime because the other half is now spent fighting the OMAC"s that are out of control as a direct result of your distrust, and there hurting your allies/assets in fighting crime then distrust does not make batman a better vigilanteHears my 2nd Q (keep thinking about the 1st though): Would admit Batman would be better fighting crime than he is now if he were married to Zatanna for example or Wonderwoman?By all means having a Robin is fine on your vigilante team but a sidekick Robin just cant pull the same weight a Zatanna would for Batman if she were his spouse. Batmans physical "needs" could be met on a regular basis, emotional needs as well, and of course magic wielding partner with different skills than his would broaden what he can take care of in Gothem. Lets not forget giving Damien a Stable Batcave to come home to would no doubt make him grow to be a more stable sidekick, cause the broken home cant help him much.Pro"s Q: How does cleaning up make Green Arrow the superior vigilante?I'm not going to acknowledge the follow ups to this one there the same question. Look if you cant pick up your own trash, your hardly cleaning up the streets cleaning up other peoples trash. Both Batman"s and his own vigilante career would be permanently damaged if there identities got out, and that would have happened without Green Arrow taking the extra steps Batman doesn"t to keep that kind of thing from happening.Back to my 1st question I gaveYou have been arguing for batman as better like you would argue one soldier is better on the battlefield from another. You make points about skill sets, fitness, personal discipline. And if "taking the law into your own hands" was just about being the best in any one on one showdown then you"d have a point.But I"ve been arguing for Green Arrow as better like I would argue Washington was a better general than Cornwallis. Bats may have a special trained platoon of sidekicks at his disposal, but Arrow has a platoon like that AND an army of swat team cops. If your president which general would you send to attack the enemy forces?A general needs certain infrastructure to fight a war better. Better number of troops, better trained troops, better supply amount, better train lines to supplies, better strongholds, ect.I have made a case for all the infrastructure a vigilante could ever want beyond his personal skill strength. From rocking the infrastructure that supports what he fights like political moves that reduce crime, to things that can support his entire life in general like a crime fighting super spouse. If the makers of sim city had a game to simulate a vigilante career, Arrows on it would have more infrastructure making him work and maintaining himwith that I'm just going to drop my other points about his archer skills and Conners combat skills. they really arnt adding that much to my overlying theme in my case about Infastructure and good Generals over good Soldiers.oh but I will adress the sourceing onesPro's Q: How did I put a huge focus on the sourcing in this debate?Follow-Up - I asked for more sources because you only gave two sources, so is asking for a few more sources naively putting a huge foucus on the sourcing in the debate?To both of these, fair enough.I guess you didnt really put a huge focus on it, my exageration was kind of a lame segway into the point I wanted to start making about comic contradictions and my non-comic sources. I retract saying you put a huge focus on anything.Follow-Up - We're not getting any details of what happened, we're bringing up individual events that can prove his talent so how is it that it can be contradicted?It can be contradicted by in one comic he can be incredably amazing and borderline godlike awsome, and in another he could be quite helpless though put in a simalar situation to the first comic. a different auther writes for batman and he's got a different take on how awsome he is, or how evil catwoman is, or how vital a robin is to him.As soon as a green arrow fan gets a hold of writing one batman comic he can retroactively write batman telling green arrow he has better results if he wants to.Follow-Up - How did your two non-comic sources have more weight compared than my eleven comic and non-comic sources? Because all comic sources prove a flimsy point at best; that one comic auther wrote it that way once. the 2 non-comic sources though support proving something else, and thats the reasoning and the validatly of the argument I was making, about the connection between seperate jobs, and the positive impact of a wife on every aspect of ones life.So I dont have to show Dinah coming in handy at one time to Green Arrow, I just have to prove its established he's married her and the other sources prove my point as to what that naturally should mean for him.with that I end my cross examination round and ask my opponent not post anything round 2 since his closing round would have been directly after the cross examination wich do to our change up in who issued the challenge Pro will now be giving that in round 1