Iron man is better then Batman

First, sorry if imisread something or didn't follow the rules fully or something, kinda new to formal debates and such.And to Begin:Batman is a Badass, granted cliched and overly moral, so is Ironman. It took the death of his parents, and countless others, and his "Glorified pacemaker" for him to use his wits, personal wealth, and technology for a better world. The Funeral of Thomas and Martha Wayne was Bruce Wayne's turning point, in the first 10 years of his life. Batman has spent the majority of his life to adapt himself to fight crime. His entire existence as The Caped Crusader is a living tribute to his father's morals and ethics. Bruce took all he knew from his brief time with his father, and applied it fully. In saying that, is Thomas Wayne overly moral?Let's take a brief step aside, in almost every movie, superhero-related or not, doesn't the protaginist see a moment where failure is the only option, but somehow they always make it? Society as a whole turned Batman in to the "cliched" escape artist that he is. His stories wouldn't be entertaining if he didn't have 98% of the answers in his utility belt,(If he had 100% of the answers his adventures would be boring, just like a utopia). As you said, "Stark is a Genuis, Billionare, playboy, Philantropist as well (also I think Stark was the one who coined that in the Avengers movie)... Plus Iron Man has fought with his addiction to Alcohol and lives everyday with a Glourified Pace-maker in his chest and the guilt of his weapons killing millions of young soldiers..." Both men intelligent, both menwealthy, both men charitable. However, Stark basks in his own light, he broadcasts his own identity, he braggs of himself. Batman is a humble superhereo, if there could be one. And Stark's addiction, I fail to see it's relevence to his morality, dude can keep away from a bottle... cool good job! If however, his addiction was rooted in the guilt of millions killed by his weapons, okay his super-identity is to repent for letting his research and money and time, being used to kill many. Couldn't he simply change the aims of his company? Drop the weapons manufacturing and pick up shelter building in Africa? No, instead he continues to sell weapons which end up in the hands of those he's fighting. Tony Stark does have a lab full of gadgets and weapons he could build into his armor, but that's just it... they're all in his lab... at his home. He'd have to fly out of combat, go to his house, enter the lab and fiddle with wrenches and computers, run diagnostics- I mean Iwouldn't use the new suit with out testing it... I don't wanna blow up because my armor's wrong, suit back up, and fly back to combat. Now that's all assuming his opponent allows him to fly off and doesn't follow him home, wait for him to leave and ransack the lab/mansion. Hell he might even wait till Stark comes back to rest and pull out that pacemaker of his.Batman simply has his gadgets on his belt, anything else he could possibly is in the indestructable-selfdriven-all-terrain vehicles he rides around in. Okay sure a nuke could take out his vehicle, it'd also hit Whateversberg, in ThatOneCountry, starting a nuclear war. Then the villian get's into a giant fight with the UN and whatever country he/she/it just nuked.Batman is Batman, just look around pop culture devours more Batman merch than Ironman. He's the people's choice.