••

One in which Batman is a mortal man who relies on his wits and physical
prowess, while Galactus is a cosmic god.

The "my guy can beat anybody" line of thinking is one of the things that has
messed up superhero comics in recent years.

++

The question was worth asking. But it didn't need to become the only
question.

••

The question is "worth asking" only if we think it is "worth asking" why
Pooh doesn't devour Piglet, why the Mad Hatter isn't being treated for
mercury poisoning, why Harry Potter isn't using his magic to make
Hermione his sex slave, etc, etc.

The real question is one of context. Superheroes in the real world would
be vigilantes, and vigilantes tend to fall victim to all the usual human
foibles. But superheroes don't live in the real world, and as such are
subjected only to such foibles as the writers assigned to them inject. Stan
Lee brought "realism" to superheroes in the 1960s, but he knew just how
far to go. Modern writers, it seems, do not.

I would like to hear one credible scenerio where Batman beats Galactus.

____________________

Alfred helps Batman. They make a wonderful dinner, Galactus is satisfied and then he leaves .

Batman could set things in motion to trap Galactus or something using his mad networking skills.

What kind of scenario do you envision where Batman is incapable of
defeating Galactus?

Every scenario I envision has Batman incapable of defeating Galactus.

A glaring example of Batman cheating can be found in THE DARK KNIGHT
RETURNS, in which he calls out Superman for a "fair fight" and then arranges
to zap him with kryptonite radiation before he gets to the appointed
meeting ground.

++

The question was worth asking. But it didn't need to become the only
question.

••

The question is "worth asking" only if we think it is "worth asking" why
Pooh doesn't devour Piglet, why the Mad Hatter isn't being treated for
mercury poisoning, why Harry Potter isn't using his magic to make
Hermione his sex slave, etc, etc.

The real question is one of context. Superheroes in the real world would
be vigilantes, and vigilantes tend to fall victim to all the usual human
foibles. But superheroes don't live in the real world, and as such are
subjected only to such foibles as the writers assigned to them inject. Stan
Lee brought "realism" to superheroes in the 1960s, but he knew just how
far to go. Modern writers, it seems, do not.

If the Watchmen characters had existed previously and still had an ongoing continuity, your comparisons would be valid. However, the characters were (in the end) created specifically for the story, and even if the Charlton characters had been used, they weren't current at the time and their world would presumably have been kept separated from the main DC Universe for the story.

Watchmen didn't rewrite existing characters or their world, as your Pooh and Potter comparisons would, so the comparisons aren't really relevant. I agree with you that creators shouldn't have turned almost the whole superhero landscape into Watchmen-wannabe-world; I disagree with you if you're saying Watchmen should never have been made.

If Watchmen had featured the JLA in main continuity, I'd think it was wrong - just as I think the recent Crises, Sins Past, The Other and Civil War were all wrong.

IMP.