Infinity War proved that Cap was right about the Sokovia Accords. Let's set the scene: Tony is talking to Strange, Wong, and Bruce about Thanos, the mad titan who wants to kill half of the universe. Suddenly, there's a spaceship that crashes in New York, and tons of damage is being done with people's lives endanger. Now, according to the Sokovia Accords, Tony has to call the UN and ask permission to fight crime. However, in IW, Tony instead acts reasonably and suits up, along with Peter, because bureaucracy would simply get in the way.

The Sokovia Accords would've protected the world like a suit of armor. The Sokovia Accords could have been negotiated about so that there were certain clauses in which the Avengers didn't need permission to operate, but overall, the Sokovia Accords wouldn't hurt anyone. The Avengers main focus shouldn't be to defeat the villain, but to protect the citizens. They should be defending Earth, not causing wars. If the Sokovia Accords were put in place, many lives would have been saved. Civilians like Charlie Spencer and those civilians in Lagos would have been alive today, but they weren't because Cap wanted to have his own freedom more than he wanted to protect others. The Avengers that sided with Cap want to be able to blast/attack who/whatever they want, whenever they want more than they want to keep people safe. Enhanced Individuals need laws too, different laws, since they're capable of much more destruction/harm to the nation than other individuals. They deserve freedom just like we do, but their powers need to be kept under control for the safety of everyone on Earth, and everyone in the galaxy.

Oof @ItsAsIf great explanation

@ItsAslf Cap wasn't responsible for Charlie Spencer's death, that was Ultron (and if you want to go a step farther back, Tony). Lagos had nothing to do with Cap protecting freedom, that was Wanda making a mistake. The only deaths that resulted from the Sokovia Accords were Zemo's fault, the UN explosion.

In fact, if Cap hadn't broken the Sokovia Accords and did superhero stuff without permission, Vision would have died much soon than he did, Thanos would have gotten the Soul Stone, and Thanos would have won much faster in Infinity War. If Scott hadn't broken he Sokovia Accords, Janet would be stuck in the Quantum Realm, Ghost would have died, and Sunny Burch would have gotten the lab to do G-d knows what with it. The end of Doctor Strange is after Civil War, and if he didn't break the Sokovia Accords, then Dormammu would have consumed Earth.

Now let's look at when people did follow them, like Peter in Homecoming. By listening to Tony, he almost let Toomes get away with stealing a lot of Avengers equipment. It was only when he decided to ignore Tony (and the Accords) that he could save the day.

The Sokovia Accords wouldn't have prevented anything, and if anything would have proved a hinderance if they were ever actually followed.

The way I see it... the Sokovia Accords only prevents the Avengers from taking action without the UN's permission, if said action is occurring outside of the US. Indeed their actions in Washington, D.C. and New York were part of the blame the Avengers had to carry to eventually decide to follow the Accords, but I believe there would be less stress between Iron Man having to stop an alien invasion in New York, so he would likely be forgiven in that case.

Forgiven for breaking the law is the point though. He shouldn't have to be forgiven, since these instances require immediate action. If the Avengers had waited for Ultron to destroy Sokovia, there'd be no more humanity.

I love all you guys’s points on this post. Thank you fr for being so insightful

@Brett3801 Exactly... I suppose Iron Man would be called to intervene in the New York invasion of the Black Order anyway, Iron Man just anticipated any permission he would have required, so I assume he would be ok with it.

Which is exactly why the Accords are pointless. If Tony and Peter are allowed to just do that anyway, what's the point of them?

For safety of logic