Theories on Whatever Happened, Happened

-Time travel clarification based on what Miles said: if you're traipsing about in your past (ie. you left 2008 to go to 1977), you have no guarantee of surviving. This is your present self in 1973, and since you never existed past 2008, you can die without negatively affecting the timeline.

However, people who are in the time they're supposed to be in (ie. lil' Jack in 1977 or lil' Ben in 1977) cannot die unless the original timeline has them dying at that moment, anyway. You can't kill JFK, Jr. as a time traveler unless you get him from the grassy knoll.

Clear?

- I'm intrigued by almost everything in the scene with Alpert. First off, Ben will be changed forever, and be an Other from that time on. His innocence will be lost. Is this part of the process of becoming an Other? Did Juliet do this? Widmore? Ethan? It does seem like the one defining characteristic of an Other is undying loyalty to the Island and the willingness to do just about anything to protect it (though Juliet sort of defies that stereotype).

Also, one of the Others mentions the fact that "Ellie" and "Charles" won't like Alpert taking Ben. Charles has to be Widmore, right? And could Ellie be Ms. Hawking? Her first name is Eloise.

And then there's the fact that Sawyer basically goads the Others with the fact that they don't want war any more than Dharma does. The Others live in an uneasy peace with Dharma for almost 20 years... and then in 1992, the Purge takes place. What changed between 1977 and then?

-Do you think Locke is ticked at Ben? Ben was honestly surprised to see Locke alive... he can't pull off a "I killed you so you could get back, it was the only way" argument. Or at least, if he does, I hope Locke isn't so gulliable as to believe it.

-It turns out that Ben's dad really is a good guy at heart. He just allows his grief for his wife and the bad situation he's in control how he acts towards his son. That said, Ben still kills him in cold blood in 1992. If Roger had some kind of change of heart after Ben's shooting, is it possible that he tries to reconcile with Ben, but New Ben won't have any of it?

-Jack refuses to save Ben, thereby causing Ben to become who he is in 2004. I think this is just another object lesson on Whatever Happened, Happened. Acting won't change the timeline. Not acting won't change the timeline.

-Someone on Lostpedia made an interesting observation comparing the kings of the Old Testament to the leaders of the Others:

A good comparison for Alpert might be in the Old Testament, where the prophet Samuel picked the first couple of kings of Israel (Saul and David), but had no real power himself. Does, then, Charles = Saul (the rejected/banished king), Ben = David (the one who fully vanquishes his people's enemies), and John = Solomon (king of the "golden age")?

Interesting theory.

That's all I've got. As always, your thoughts welcome.