User blog comment:Blinkn/Were they a little bit evil during Civil War?/@comment-4652104-20130527060630/@comment-3406131-20130527102533

No more to say there. Also in Front Lines, Captain position is contested by Sally, in the same issue (I think) who gave Stark the benefits of his actions. Even if Cap had to fight for his rights, he neglected the civilians in this affair. (7 casualties in the final battle I think, far less than Stamford, Cooperstown or Bentonville but still civilians wounded directly by heroes battling.

Also Ben Urich seems to neutrally support Stark actions, without approving them. (in New Warriors Vol 4, also, was really Stark responsible for this or not, in order to have a reason to enforce the shield and the SHRA ?)

Both parts were rights, but I will stand with the mutant/anti-registration, as always. Even if it's hard to stay on it, you have never to give up your rights. I think it's one of your Founding Fathers or Presidents who says that a people who give up freedom for liberty doesn't deserve any of them. Stark and Richards were wrong, even if they weren't evil. For Pym, it depends if it was the Skrull or the "hero" (who had tends to be an ass on some occasions). When I've heard that it wasn't him behind the Civil War, he catch up back part of my admiration (especially when he and the Mighty Avengers opposed the FF, hypocritical Reed..)

Also, it was proved by the Gate of Reed Richards that on most occasions where the Civil War had ended quickly or didn't started, Reed without Pym and Stark was successful. Also the rivalry Stark/Cap is responsible of most of the Civil War.