[the phantom]

I'm not a clone of Tolkien, so that's bound to happen occasionally. I'm fine with that.

I'm not quite sure what profit you hope to gain by making statements that are fundamentally absurd.

Hmm... I don't understand the reasoning behind that retort.

Now, if we were discussing who Aragorn's father was, my statement would indeed be absurd, since Tolkien has clearly stated who Aragorn's father was and Tolkien is the creator and ultimate authority when it comes to Middle Earth.

But I was expressing a real life opinion on warfare and fighting evil. Tolkien did not create the world's rules of warfare and is not the ultimate authority on matters of diplomacy, evil, and parley practices. They are not under the jurisdiction of Middle Earth- they merely play a role in Middle Earth (in other words, it's okay to disagree with him).

But if you still aren't satisfied, just look at what The Saucepan Man said...

Of course, we are discussing the film here, so it is a different context... as I have said, we are discussing the film here, so perhaps the standard is different

Bingo! The Aragorn we are discussing isn't even Tolkien's Aragorn.

How about challenging to a gunfight a guy who's ten feet tall and can only be killed with a shot from a rifle from a window in a certain part of his back?

Well, yes, that's the situation with Sauron. But if, like some have said, you must always play honorably and never stoop to your opponent's level, then shooting the guy in the back is still wrong no matter what the situation, so the proper thing to do would be fight fair and lose (which is pretty silly if you ask me).

The Wyatt Earp anaolgy is off in any event, since it involves shooting someone in the back, whereas Frodo and Sam went right up to Sauron's doorstep

I don't agree with that. Interpret your opponent's "front" and "back" as meaning "where he's looking and where his attention is focused" and "where he's not looking and where his attention is not focused". The analogy is perfectly acceptable.