Well, then it's one of 3 things.
Either You:
- Lie (knowing what I said but saying otherwise)
- Misinformed (Have the wrong information)
- or/and Confused (Think you know what I said, but didn't actually say).
It's abundantly clear what I said, I showed it to you, so for you to say things I didn't say in light of evidence. You pick your poison.
This is the quote where all the argument started. I want you to read that and see if you agree with that now. You said it is a manga fact and so it should be true. However, we know it isn't.
If we go by what the characters say, then does that mean Pica was strong enough to crush both navy and pirates on his own? A group that consists of Luffy, Zoro, Law, Fujitora, and Sabo. It doesn't make sense. I would have said the same thing back then but I would never have had manga facts to back it up.
The quote where the argument started? I don't recall, but I'll oblige you.
There's this thing called context and reading between the lines.
Pica's ability is to manipulate his surroundings.
His power is such that he can kill an entire country all alone, that's simply a fact.
His ability is ideal to take on the entire country since the goal it to take down both Navy and Pirates.
As long as he hides underneath the rock, he's nigh untouchable.
Does that mean he's as strong as an Admiral? No, simply means he's an opponent that could is difficult to deal with.
Pica was absolutely correct, nonetheless wasn't claiming to be stronger. In context with his DF powers and given how little is truly known about Fujitora, Pica would be an issue for anyone. He'd kill lots of people easily with his powers.
More so, Pica isn't an important character. It wouldn't take much to simply deduce that he just overstimates his strength when even Joker would struggle to do so. This gives more credence to the contextual idea he's saying this based on his DF powers which is justified with probably an aspect of underestimating his opponents. Context.
Also, you're being terribly dishonest in this aspect,
I'm sure you know that what a character says has more weight than others depending on context.
- If Crocodile states he can defeat Whitebeard, we know that's just bravado talking, it's nonsensical.
- If Kid says he'll become Pirate King over Luffy, we know that's nonsense.
- If some random relatively no-name character says they'll defeat an Emperor or Admiral, we know they're just being delusional or overestimating their own abilities.
- If Kizaru says Weevil is as powerful as Whitebeard in his prime physically, we know his words hold tremendous weight.
- So, when Fujitora says what he believes about Luffy, it holds tremendous weight.
I know you're intelligent enough to read between the lines, but you're trying to find technicalities to use to justify you logical fallacies here.
We never called Fuji a liar, we always thought of his words describing Luffy's potential.
Sure you did.
"I can tell
you have got the strength to back your words up."
That's not the same thing as saying "I can tell
you will have the strength to back those words up"
Do you know the difference between "
You Have" and "
You Will Have"? One is present tense, and one is future tense.
So,
tell me exactly how you knew Fujitora was talking about potential which is a future tense? Did you have a translation that differed? Or a raw that said otherwise?
You have nothing to showcase.
The best thing you could have possibly stated was this, but you didn't even do that, you brought up Pica who was saying something truthful if one simply took the time to see the context.
The best thing that could have been said was Fujitora was agreeing with Luffy's strength in regard to challenging the Emperors in the sense of not having to run away which would mean he's strong enough to challenge them.
And being strong enough to challenge them is all that's necessary especially since he's the protagonist who unlike other characters has the ability to power-up whenever the plot necessitates.
This was another one of your point. Lucci also tanked gear 2 like BM did against gear 4, does that Lucci couldn't be defeated? Then you showed us this picture of Vergo blocking with haki.
Actually, I'm pretty sure you're twisting what I said once again, not surprised. I didn't say it's proof for defeating, I said proof for hurting.
Keyword: HURT
I said just because an attack is blocked doesn't mean if it's not blocked, it won't hurt.
So, what is untrue about that?
Blocking an attack isn't proof it can't hurt you.
And now what you reply is by saying that Oda could have created a similar scenario to Wano and could have made Luffy defeat BM. However, that did not happen, hence why we say you were wrong about Luffy defeating BMP physically.
Irrelevant.
Has nothing to do with it not happening.
It's to do with IF he wanted.
Wano is no different to WCI in relation to the strength gap, if not bigger.
All Oda had to do to make Luffy strong enough to defeat was a power-up, and that's what he's doing here.
Your point is moot.
However, that did not happen, hence why we say you were wrong about Luffy defeating BMP physically.
The arc couldn't progress without a SH victory. It was a SH victory.
If it wasn't a territorial defeat against Big Mom, it'd have had to be a physical defeat. You couldn't refute this statement right here.
Unlike you, my reasons were all justified and proven in the end; yours were short-sighted, lacked insight and was simply based on "Big Mom is a Yonko".
Unlike you, I was right that Oda needed a victory for the SHs for reasons I gave which were all justified in the end. If it wasn't a territorial victory, the other option was a physical defeat.
- Do you know what else proves my point? The fact that Oda literally took Big Mom out of the arc in order to justify the lack of engagement between the 2.
What was yours? Nothing propagated nothing.
Did you make any reasons why Luffy's defeat progressed the story? No, you probably didn't and you probably didn't have any good reasons.
The best you can do is point out petty details whereas I got almost everything about the arc right because my reasoning was well justified by my understanding of the story and how it was developing and how it has developed.
About narrative point of view. The reason I ignore that is because like i said before, in every manga that narrative factor is present.
Nope, your answer there was rather poor because you failed to even understand that.
Huge difference between stating
why something needs to happen in an arc and what happens ultimately. Your insight was just poor.
Anyone can claim that Luffy will become Pirate King by the end of the series, not exactly rocket science, requires no insight. It however requires insight to state why a victory is needed or the lack thereof for the propagation of the story.
If Katakuri wasn't Luffy's opponent in WCI, it'd have been Big Mom, and if Big Mom was his opponent, she'd have been defeated because every arc needs to end as a victory, that is simply a fact for the SHs and for anyone who has followed this story keenly.
Ultimately, anyone who claimed that Big Mom wouldn't be defeated because she's too strong was wrong. The reason she wasn't defeated physically was not due to strength, but due to the fact her defeat wasn't yet necessary.
- If what I'm saying here is wrong. Then if we use your godly logic here, then Luffy should also lose to Kaido. If you claim Kaido will be defeated, but claim Big Mom couldn't be defeated, you're ultimately a hypocrite.
