AHK

 

An equally interesting question, I'd say, would be what if Sasuke had killed Naruto. Would Sakura still love Sasuke? I think she would if it's the Sakura of chapter 693. And were Sasuke to even give her the slightest indication of acceptance despite what he had done, she would jump at the chance.

Lol given what Sakura has shown, she wouldn't hesitate. She'd step over his corpse like Hinata did Neji and wouldn't give it a second thought. After all the things Sasuke did to her, and on top of him threatening to kill and enslave all of her friends, family, etc, she still asked to go with him on his journey. She wouldn't hesitate in the slightest, and it's sad as hell XD

What I mean by that is how they handle a majoir character dying. Can I put Harry Potter Spoilers? I mean it has been a while. Look at the way Snape killed Dumbledore compared to Sasuke's attempt at killing Sakura and Naruto's reaction.

After Snap killed Dumbledore, Harry was pissed. Pissed enough that he wanted to kill Snape so badly. Harry was like this when anybody he loved was killed. He had to fight against the emotions that killing is wrong even if justified. That the law should be the means to persecute. (Although, I think having your souls sucked out and eaten is a far worse than death, but this is a different story.)

Then JK Rowling wrote Snapes story that is probably the most tragic and far better than Sasuke's story of revenge. "Always." Snape was actually a good guy. but very few knew this. People thought he was a hard ass, but it was only because he secluded himself from the rest. I would go so far to say that Rowling had more love and thought into Snape than Kishimoto did with Sasuke. In the end, Snape revealed his true self and you realize that everything that occured was a master plan by Dumbledore himself. I could even argue Snape was better than Dumbledore in terms of caring for Harry, but again that is a different story.
 

Yeah, I'm going to have to hard pass on this, especially that bit at the end. 

 

Firstly, Snape's backstory was not well written, it was sure as hell not tragic, and be absolutely no means was Snape "actually a good guy". Snape was an absolute horrible person, and for some reason he seems to get a ridiculous pass from a large portion of that fanbase, and it's embarrassing. You could argue that Snape was better at caring for Harry than Dumbledore, but that would be an absolute and total lie. The fact that anyone would try to make that argument when Snape did nothing but torment Harry, an innocent child, all the while knowing that he was the reason Harry was orphaned is absurd. As it relates to "always", that is the most ridiculous scene and the absolute dumbest way, other than what Kishi wrote, that I've ever seen an author try to excuse the transgressions of an evil character. Snape "loved" Lily" always, but was perfectly content sentencing her husband and son to death. Snape "loved" Lily" always, but was perfectly content to bully and torment her innocent child for years on end simply because he looked like his father.  

 

Snape was a terrible character, and Rowling's attempt to make him good and excuse his past transgressions was laughable, and its sad that the fanbase ate that kitten up.

 

Bringing Sasuke back to the village wasn't his responsibility either and yet he did it anyway....despite how bad Sasuke treated him. I would argue that Sasuke and Naruto being best friends shouldn't even exist because they bonded over nothing. Naruto saw Sasuke as his rival and all of a sudden "We are best friends." How did they become best friends? I don't know about you, but my relationship with my best friend doesn't involve trying to kill them because "they remind me of being weak." Goku and Vegeta feel more like best friends than Sasuke and Naruto.

Sasuke: "I am going to kill you, Naruto."
Naruto: "Awwww, I love you too, Sasuke."

Sakura: "I love you, Naruto."
Naruto: "You're full of kitten, Sakura."

I don't know who is more insane...Naruto or Sasuke.

Naruto and Sakura had a far better relationship than Sasuke had with anyone and they had more connections, but Naruto was willing to throw everything away, including the village, just to bring him back. For what? Nothing. Naruto is a dude that said "How can I be hokage and confess my feelings to a girl when I can't even keep my promises?" Really, Naruto? You barely know the guy.

So yeah, I can't accept that as an argument. Sorry.

This reminds of the kitten reasoning in Dark Knight Rises. "I knew you were the Batman when you gave me that look."

Naruto: "We are best friends because Sasuke gave me that look: Not the 'I want to have sex with you look,' but the 'Hey man, we're both orphans' look. He gave me that wink and I knew we were best friends."

 

And here I thought best friends were people that loved and cared about each other and helped each other out when times got rough and you know....actually being friendly? It would explain alot though. In the Narutoverse, wanting to murder you is a sign of love and confessing your love for you means "I hate you. Go away."

So that's what I have been doing wrong all these years.....*sarcasm*

You're comparing a situation where somebody's friend was literally going to die to that same friend being obligated to pay all of another friends bills. The two aren't even remotely similar. I believe that Naruto's friendship with Sasuke was incredibly and criminally fabricated and terribly written, but it doesn't compare to what you're implying with Sakura. Sakura is a damn adult. It isn't Naruto's responsibility to pay all of her bills or take care of her. 

 

Instead you're arguing she needs anger management classes. I don't remember this fandom worrying about that when she decked Naruto for something Sai said. This fandom laughed and spent time arguing that Sakura wasn't the domestic abuser that NH fans claimed she was. Now it's time to play the violence straight?

A complete non-sequitur, they're not similar occurrences. Sakura hitting Naruto was a gag (although overused) and was only used in those specific situations. Sakura destroying her house was to scare Salad into shutting her mouth because she didn't like the questions that Salad was asking. The only part of that scene that was supposed to be funny (but failed miserably) was her reaction to the house falling. Her actions towards Salad were of the kind that indicates abuse. Normally, I'd probably agree with you, but not here. 

 

 

She did in the fact that (And this is put solely on 699) her love matured. 699 is different from past actions in that Sakura is pretty much asking to be with Sasuke as a partner. Sasuke then pretty much responds "not now, but when I return".

No, she didn't mature. Not at all. There was nothing that was shown whenever Sasuke was around that showed she had matured i regards to her feelings. She was nothing more than a 12 year old fangirl in a 17 year old's body. 

 

No, actually, what you say in explanation for why you put together something cannot functionally invalidate any of the other narrative functions an event has. You can dislike the choice, and that's perfectly valid, but you cannot say it invalidates anything. You cannot say "Neji's death served no other purpose", because narrative structure -demands- a moment like this, death or otherwise, and it demands a follow up moment where the character is functionally saved from darkness. That Kishimoto decided to put them here, when they already had the Pain Arc moment is telling of a set-up he is putting forward in 700. The point that he is trying to have Naruto recognize Hinata has always been there is a very telling difference from his initial reaction of her and even her later ones. That Neji's death completes his arc, dying for the people he loves, -cannot- be undertold. You cannot say he was emasculated for doing what his father did, because his father -chose- to die for who he loved, not out of duty. Hiashi was ready to die willingly, and his brother explicitly did not have to agree. 

 

You have a mirror in this moment, Hinata willing to die, but Neji choosing instead to die for the people he loved. That they parallel reinforces the point of freedom his father put forward, -that- is the takeaway. You are missing, ignoring, or twisting the takeaway if you are coming up with some other conclusion. 

 

The Hyuuga clan was already improving, and it was never Hinata's goal to fix the Hyuuga clan? I don't know what is your point with this argument. 

 

And then we have the diminishing of Hinata's reaction to Neji with the "Step over the corpse stuff" and later bashing which just shows your hatred of things, and that's a bit disappointing.

 

On the Sakura bit, have you considered that you never liked Sakura? Because if you are saying "I like Sakura, but I don't like the feelings she had for Sasuke", then you are saying "I don't like Sakura". The "weak bits" you refer are and always have been part of Sakura, have never gone anywhere. They weren't put at the forefront in the ending, they had relevance because they were significant in the moments that occurred. 

 

This is way off topic though. If you want more detail on the tearing apart of your argument, you can always make a post on the debate thread to my many take-aparts of posts there.

Your entire first three paragraphs are irrelevant. I can say that it invalidates everything, because it does. This is another one of those facts that you can't seem to grip, and it was word of mouth from Kishimoto himself. Neji did not die there out of some greater sense of purpose. He got sacrificed for the sake of a forced pairing that had zero buildup. He was, again, literally just a corpse for Hinata to step over to get closer to Naruto. Neji's father died because it was his place as a side branch member. He did not wish that for Neji, and yet Neji still died like a dog. He was emasculated because Kishi said he was. There also wasn't any "diminishing of her reaction" as that's exactly what she did.

 

The bold is probably your worst retort in lieu of any argument you never really had to begin with. I liked Sakura, along with Naruto, right up until they betrayed everything they were as per the narrative. I could just as easily argue that anyone that liked and excuses the ending and what Sakura became never really liked Sakura to begin with, given that she's just a pale, pathetic imitation of what she was (all of the preceding is actually fact and arguable), which I believe was my original point in response to the thread. Whether she lived or died at LOI, it wouldn't have mattered given the author killed her anyway, and Kishi didn't know how to write regardless.

 

The last statement is equal parts lol worthy as it is false.

 

Stick to the topic. It's now going on a page an half of stuff completely unrelated to the topic at hand. The OP brought an interesting what-if and almost every response is off-topic or sarcastic quips that don't even pretend to take the OP seriously.

 

And I hate to do this because the person who brought it up is new and hasn't been involved in the 10,000 other times this topic has come up...but the topic of Kishimoto's intent as it relates to pairings has managed to creep its way into almost every thread even remotely related to pairings and its needs to stop. Create a thread solely to that or leave in the debate thread; either is fine.

 

But for the love of God, please stop infesting ever f-ing thread with this subject. 

Sure thing

I have, actually. Given, I believe mine is delivered more fair-headed than most and acknowledges Kishimoto's talent and Naruto's success and what it does well, even if it has its flaws. 
 
Neji's death is functionally well done because it works more than just that, and has many effective layers at work. It takes away someone close to Naruto, one of the first people in a dark place Naruto saves. Neji's arch comes full circle. He also brings Naruto and Hinata closer together, yes, specifically in the way for Naruto to realize that Hinata has always been by his side, as per the interview anyway. Neji's death also comes right after Shikaku's, adding to the nameable character's death toll and creating more menace around Obito. It also sets up Naruto's despair moment.
 
Jirayai's is too mind, if a different weight of sorts because he is the mentor that passes away, a common pick really narratively.
 
How was Sakura's character ruined? I'm assuming this is a pairing complaint, given the Neji is a pairing complaint, I assume your frustration is because of pairings.

You really haven't, and there isn't anything "fair minded" about anything you have said this far.

Neji's death was not functionally well done, and there were no layers to it. First of all, any deeper meaning to Neji's death was lost and invalidated when Kishi inexcusably said that Neji's death was simply for the sake of NH. Neji's death served no other purpose, and at face value Neji's character was emasculated by it. He died exactly like his father did, his death reinforced everything that his character was supposed to escape. Not only that, but had Neji's death served purpose in the first place, it would have been destroyed with the ending, where hinata did absolutely jack kitten to improve the Hyuuga clan. Neji's only purpose was so that Hinata can step over his corpse because she is a single minded waste of space that couldn't do anything but parrot the name of someone she never knew but was infatuated with. She was weak garbage, and Neji died because of it.

Neji's death was nothing in comparison to the others.

Sakura's character was butchered in large part due to the pairing, as her ending reduced everything that had been good about her and put her worst qualities in the spotlight, and made those her core personality following.

You can tell this when people are more pissed off than sad about Neji's death. They were even more pissed off on Kishimoto's reason whye he killed Neji off. Kishimoto ain't no JK Rowling or George RR Martin.
I also love how the proenders blamed Sakura for it. "Why didn't she heal him? She could have saved him." I am sorry you don't accept that Neji had to be cupid to force Naruto to be with Hinata, but you don't have to be salty about it and blame other characters. Even with medical ninjutsu, there is only so much you can do to save people even if she tried. Just like how Tsunade couldn't save Dan.

Kishi is bad, but Rowling isn't much better. Saying "Kishimoto isn't Rowling" is like saying the Browns aren't the Colts. They both sucked lol

 

So she does. Stay tuned for the next lecture. I don't know about rabidly, given I've delivered criticism multiple times.

 

Sakura's death would have to be done right. It's not a Jirayai death, or a Neji death level, both effective deaths, but Sakura is more prominent character than both of them. Readers would want pay off, which is why the timing of it to happen in the Land of Iron Arc is really iffy. 

No, you really haven't lol

 

It doesn't matter when she died, as the ending killed her anyway (partially my point about you to begin with). And Neji's death was not effective at all, and wasn't even in the same realm as Jiraiya. Kishi said in an interview with a reporter that he killed Neji for NH. Let's not even begin to compliment. 

Not really many good villains. Obito and Pain were the best, mainly because they were more personal and impactful to Naruto himself. Pain could have been better if Nagano was able to fight himself. The use of the bodies as a proxy really served to dilute the personal fight with Naruto, which is why Obito was better. Obito was Naruto turned inside out, and he was there to combat Naruto physically, mentally, and emotionally in person. It was much more of a grudge match.

Madara, Kaguya, and Sasuke were all bad villains growing worse as they went. Sasuke specifically was terrible, his ideals made no sense, he was literally a watered down knock off of Madara, and was only strong because everything he had in his arsenal wasn't his, it was all power gifted to him by asspulls and plot convenience. His strength came off the back of others, his connection to Naruto was absolutely forced and cringe worthy, and the whole thing about Indra and Asura was a bs way to try and keep Sasuke level with Naruto, when it was clear Naruto was well and beyond Sasuke. Like the Juubi at one point actually saw the Sage within Naruto, clearly foreshadowing Naruto to be the next coming of Hagoromo, yet that gets retconned because Kishi had this ridiculous Uchiha fetish. Everything about Sasuke was terrible at the end, as was the rest of the story lol

Respectfully, we can't nit-pick what is and isn't canon.
 
To pre-face this response, it's canon that Naruto didn't love Sakura. I think what is really the debate of things is -if- that makes sense, or if the information of that was clear, or if it indeed contradicts earlier information. Even if it blatantly contradicts (Which many DC and Marvel comic books famously do in their re-launches of their universe), it's still canon. Ignoring canon doesn't make it not canon. Saying it "isn't canon to me" doesn't change it either, canon doesn't work that way.
 
Not saying that's being done, Though I saw AHK say as much and frankly, AHK, it's not something that can be debated. Not even saying this to be mean, but I want to start with that as a pre-face, because I think that is at least important to acknowledge. (Saying you wish it wasn't canon though, perfectly valid!)

I'll get back to your first statement in a second.

Despite what you say, it is canon and factual that Naruto was in love with Sakura. It is 100 percent factual that the reason Naruto made the PoaL was because he loved Sakura, and wanted to see her happy at the cost of his own happiness (an example of love). It is also a fact that the events that led up to LoI is were Sai learning that Naruto loved Sakura per a conversation with Naruto himself, and then Sai telling Sakura and Sakura coming to the realization that what Sai said was true. He very fact that she tried to manipulate his feelings is a testament to that simple fact in its own right.

Which brings me back to your first quote: "Respectfully, we can't nit-pick what is and isn't canon." Look, we can debate till the sun goes down, and you can believe whatever floats your boat, but don't try this hypocritical nonsense on me. You can't say that you can't nit-pick what is and what isn't canon, and then proceed to say that Naruto didn't love Sakura, when it is a canon fact that he was.

Canonically? No, Naruto didn't love Sakura, -at least- in the sense of romantic love, I.E., pre-Last, he never felt love before. He only understood the concept.
 
I disagree with "understanding" Naruto more than anyone else, though certainly more than others, sure.
 
I -do- though, agree about the Naruto/Sasuke stuff feeling contrived. Again, all Team 7 relationships, as I usually say, suffer from their initial executions. 
 
I do also highly disagree that Hinata was just "shoe-horned", as you are either ignoring it was developed earlier on, or just missing those details.

Except that he did, and that was proven many times over. He absolutely loved her, that is a simple statement of fact. She did understand Naruto more than anyone else, the only other people that were close/right there with her were Tsunade, Jiraiya, and maybe Kakashi. Shikamaru as well. Which makes what she did worse.

The fact that you disagree doesn't make it any less true. Hinata was absolutely shoehorned in, as she literally meant nothing to the story and Naruto didn't know her from a doorpost until she was forced in his face. There were no details to be ignored, nor were there any developement early on. She was only relevant when she was willing to step over the corpses of others like Neji. She was literally forced in the story, and even the fact that the Last had to retcon the events of Naruto's early days to force Hinata's relevance proves it.

No matter how you try and twist that, Hinata was shoehorned in. That's a fact.

I think saying Sakura -did- understand Naruto is critically missing the elements that suggest that she didn't fully understand Naruto yet, in fact, quite a few people don't fully understand Naruto. 
 
And no, she wasn't, certainly not in part two. Not shoe-horning it in even, just stating the truth.

Actually, she understood him more than anyone else at that point (not counting Sasuke, although that miserable piece of kittens "understanding" of him is contrived as hell).

And yes, she was. The very point of the confession itself, and what led up to it, confirms it. It isn't up for debate, to be honest. Naruto loved Sakura, that is a fact. Naruto only had interest in Sakura to that point and later. That's also confirmed. Hinata got shoe-horned in later, during the war, because Kishimoto is incompetent.

This scene still remains one of the more embarrassing parts of the series, especially on Sakura's part, given that she understood Naruto so much. To try and emotionally manipulate him as she did, while well intentioned, was absolutely awful of her and it's shameful that she didn't apologize was disgraceful as well.

The stark difference to the above is ultimately Sakura isn't the love-interest. (Thus why I always caution about making comparisons to other mediums, as characters, contexts, and circumstances very rarely align).

Except that she was, no matter how much you try to shoehorn it otherwise.

Honestly I wouldn't really compare a foreign medium with an American medium like this, particularly given the characters relationships at the time in Naruto. They barely knew eachother during the Tenchi Bridge arc, and are still a rather fresh team during the Forest Stuff too. 
 
Granted, scene is pretty good in the show though.

Wait, did you actually just say that Naruto and Sakura barely knew each other during the Tenchi Bridge arc?

you'd think after tricksie got after him/her for acting like that, analyzer would stop. but nope,still being the same elitest. anyways back to web browsing 'runs off into distance'

  
This thread would suck w/o analyzer.

SS does have initial tragic love to it, though it does not stay that way.

In a sense, you're right. SS makes normal tragedies look like High School Musical.

Football players bowing to the flag because they feel oppressed is just stupid. They make millions and millions each year, but they're oppressed? Give me a freaking break. And Trump has millions of people backing his statements up and completely agree with what he said. If you can't sand for the flag during the national anthem, then quite frankly, you get the kitten out. 
 
Trump limiting freedom of speech? Have you looked up what the radical left is doing lately? THAT is limiting free speech. Trump saying bad things about football players who don't stand for the flag is not limiting free speech. For Christ sake.
 
Also, the stock market has been at an all time high ever since he got into office. You can continue to think he's not doing a good job, blind as you may be, but I'll be voting for him again. As far as I, as a working class American am concerned, he's doing a damn fine job. I'd rather have a bully in office than another pussy who actually did nothing but lie and play golf every chance he got.

Well, isn't this just rife with hypocrisy.

First of all, the players never said they felt oppressed, they were kneeling to draw attention to issues they perceive as unjust, including but not limited to the fact that their president just called them "sons of kittenes" for excercising a right given to them under the constitution he's supposed to uphold and protect. Telling the players to stand or get out does nothing to solve the problem and makes you look ignorant.

There is absolutely no reason to say he is doing a good job. Literally none. In regards to that "pussy" who did nothing but lie and golf, Trump has already spent over 70 million golfing, when Obama spent around 97 million in 8 years per Forbes.

ikr. and is she seriously playing the
"not a shipper" card here 700 posts later? 0.o I'm not a shipper and I think that's total bull. if she wasn't a shipper she wouldn't still be harassing you guys on this forum, she'd actually have a life like the rest of us instead of stalking this site....

Is that really a necessary statement? If you don't agree, ignore and move on.

No, he didn't do it with the intention to kill thousands of people. He didn't kill thousands of people. As the Ten Tails was wielded days later, and that he stood against the Ten Tails, pointing blame on him for it is stretching it. 
 
No, he wasn't robbing people of their free will? They could sitll act and choose and had free will. This is a misunderstanding of what free will is. Sure, he was setting up a system for the world to follow, but he was not enslaving the world. 
 
No, you -cannot- say that is bad writing. 
t
Bad writing would be saying: The imagery that Kishimoto was too hammering of the point. Too much summary. The exposition isn't flowing well. The plot is jumbled.
 
Here, it's rather clear. This is -only- a detail you dislike, I.E., Sasuke was not punished enough for you. It has -nothing- to do with awful writing. 
 
There is a difference between objectivity in assessing writing quality, and subjectivity, in assessing whether you like what you are reading. This is subjectivity. It is fine. As long as you understand that it has zero to do with writing technique and craft.
 

​And no, for Naruto and Sakura you didn't, and still haven't listed -any- details. You gave a statement ,but did not give it any foundation. I.E., you said 
 
"
In regards to Naruto and Sakura, the ending, from 699 onward (693 in Sakura's case) reneged on everything their characters were and could have been. Everything that appeared in the ending was abysmal and pathetic in regards to both of them. They were a betrayal of what they had used to be."
 
But how are they a betrayal? You make a statement but do not say why or how this is. You do not say what was abysmal and pathetic in regards to both of them. You statements lack points of the manga to reference to. In other words, you were not specific at all, and laid out a poor argument.

Yes, he did. he declared his intentions to destroy the leaf, and kill anyone in his way, and that was a stance that he held and maintained throughout the duration of the story. Obito and the Akatsuki were merely a means to an end with him. He did kill thousands, and he intended to kill thousands. That is a fact. It doesn't matter if the Juubi was resurrected days later, Sasuke played a vital role in its resurrection. Sasuke deciding after the fact to fight it means nothing, given that it was him that helped facilitate the circumstances of its revival. Sasuke is in a large way to blame.

Yes, it is robbing them of their free will. When your only choices are obey or die, you have no free will. That by its very definition is slavery. Sasuke planned to enslave everyone. This is also an undeniable fact, not matter how you try and wriggle about and defend Sasuke.

You have literally no concept what bad writing is. Bad writing is not limited to bad grammer, writing structure, etc. When you try and justify the crimes of a group of people with the lazy ass excuse of "curse of hatred" in order to elicit a faux sense of forgiveness, and then throw away all accountability for people who have committed vicious crimes simply out of friendship and no real punishment following their heinous involvement in a war that killed tens of thousands and when said person planned on butchering thousands more, that is bad writing. It isn't just a detail I don't like. The idea that you try and brush it off as a matter of objectivity and subjectivity is absolutely laughable.

Again, with regards to Naruto and Sakura, I was absolutely specific enough. "Everything that appeared in the ending was abysmal and pathetic in regards to both of them. They were a betrayal of what they had used to be."

We might as well stop. If the crux of your arguments are based on Sasuke not intending to kill anyone (despite him saying multiple times that he did), that he is excused from his crimes because the Juubi wasn't resurrected until days after (despite the fact that he played a vital role in resurrecting it), and objectivity vs subjectivity, then your argument was weak to begin with. At this point, the only reason you're defending the ending is to defend the ending, not argue something with any actual merit.

Your example doesn't work.It's an immediate effect, while not even we knew what was going to be done with the Ten Tails at that time. More accurate would be someone to ask to borrow a gun, but not saying what it was for. It's stretching it for the sake of pointing blame on him for something. Besides, Bee better fits your example, even if that was not his intention, and -he- isn't responsible either. 
 
No, that is not slavery, as he expected resistance. Yes, his plan was stupid, though, but he believed in it.
 
No, it's not awful writing, because your complaint has nothing to do with writing. Naruto and Kakashi are not impartial judges, but they are influential. We have no idea how the proceedings went, only their outcome. You don't -like- that this happened, and that's fine, for -all- the reasons you stated, which support it fine. But it is not -awful- writing, because none of your reasons are based or about writing. All Kishimoto has to do with Sasuke going out free is support it with reasons, I.E., Kakashi and Naruto influenced them, and with Naruto being a hero, Sasuke's part in the end, and Kakashi being Hokage, Sasuke was let free. He did so, and thus, it is supported.
 
As for Naruto and Sakura, you haven't really given any details to support this position. Can you elaborate?

Ok. The idea that you equate Sasuke's culpability to Bee is actually laughable. Bee is in no way closer in line with my example from Sasuke. Sasuke is the one that attacked Bee to obtain that chakra to begin with, and then turned it over to Obito. Furthermore, your point about immediacy is irrelevant and asinine. Just because it didn't take place immediately does not mean that Sasuke is any less responsible. Sasuke contributed to the deaths of thousands of people. Ignorance is also not an excuse. First of all, ignorance of a law is not a proper defense in the face of the law. Sasuke contributed to the murder of thousands. One way or another, that's a fact. However, To say Sasuke didn't know is absolutely ridiculous. He knew exactly what Obito was going to do, and he knew what would happen. He didn't care. Also, in your response to HalfDemonInuasha, you mentioned him not doing it out of malice, which is a full blown lie. The entire reason Sasuke joined the Akatsuki is because of the truth about Itachi. Everything following was done out of hatred.

Yes, it is slavery. He was literally robbing people of their free will. And if they expressed their free will, he'd butcher them. That is slavery. Whether or not he believed in his plan is irrelevant.

Yes, it is awful writing, and has everything to do with awful writing. Sasuke walked free despite responsibility in killing thousands of people. He put his relationship with someone who was never actually friends ahead of the justice of thousands of people the world over. Naruto, someone who had to learn the responsibility of leadership as he watched others get slaughtered in front of him, failed and disregarded the responsibilities of leadership at the first available instance of it. The fact that he can look his friends in the eye, like Shikamaru and Ino, knowing that a man partially responsible for their murder faced zero repercussions for his actions is poor writing. The fact that he can look at his grandmother in the eye when the man that plotted her murder faced zero repercussions for his actions is poor writing.,the fact that Sasuke gets a slap on the wrist after murdering people and terrorist actions is poor writing. The fact that Kakashi and Naruto hid his real intentions from the Kage having just ushered in an era supposedly based on openness and trust is poor writing.

You're entirely twisting events and characters just to defend terrible writing lol

As for what I said about Naruto and Sakura, I was specific enough.