Anyone else rooting against Dany?

[BalerionTheCat]

6 hours ago, OldGimletEye said:

Well certainly if Tommen was actually ruling and ruling fairly decently, or even somewhat below average, I'd be totally opposed to Dany re-taking the throne.

As far as Aegon goes, I don't think he'll have the chance to bring any type of stability to Westeros before Dany shows up. And I don't know what Aegon's attitude towards RR will be. With Jon Con at his side, it could actually even be worse than what Dany ends up believing about it.

Certainly, I'm no fan of the argument that Dany deserves the throne because it belongs to the Targs and will always belong to the Targs, no matter what. I think that line of argument is nothing but intellectual trash. I have nothing but contempt for it. It's way too simplistic in my view.

Similarly assertions that Dany "is just like the Starks" is another argument that so mind numbingly dumb I think I got brain damage from reading it. In fact, I'm thinking about suing from having to read it.

But, the fact of the matter is that it's not likely to be the situation that Tommen will get the chance to rule Westeros. The facts on the ground, as they stand now, and what they will likely be in the future is that Cersei will be running things. And Cersei needs to go.

The upshot here is that, in my view, the specific facts here will matter.

As far as innocents dying. They always do in war. Even if the war is justified in some sense. And that's a good reason why people need to think carefully before starting them. I think wars are terrible and should be avoided, but I'm not a peace at any price person either.

I don't think people like Aerys, Ramsay, Joffrey and Cersei should be able to act like assholes, but then be able to hide behind children and say, "You can't touch me because you'll hurt the children!"

As far as Dany's "right" to rule, I'm not looking here for 100% intellectual perfection on her part. I'm looking for "good enough". In my view "good enough" is 1) She tosses Cersei aside, 2) Has a reasonable chance of bringing peace and stability to Westeros, and 3) Completely disowns and disavows Aerys's actions as being inappropriate and out of bounds. In other words, she disowns the Joffrey Baratheon view of monarchy.

The thing is here is I'm not a fan of monarchy for obvious reasons. But, all the characters in story basically believe in monarchy. There isn't anybody in the story that really believes in some other system of government or fighting to change things completely. So your kind of stuck thinking about these issues in that context. The monarch holds authority in Westeros because as Varys says, "that's what men believe." Yeah, it would be nice if beliefs evolved in Westeros to support popular democracy, but that's not going to happen. I think it would be too much of a stretch to believe something like that would happen in Westeros anyway. Though I do believe the idea that monarchs shouldn't be able to do as they please is something that can take hold in Westeros.

I was saying "assume" for the sake of argument. Of course Tommen is already dead. And we don't know if he would have been strong enough to assume the position. Aegon, I would not enter a debate, but I believe he has fairly good chances to bring some peace to Westeros ... before Daenerys and the WW are fully unleashed. But yes, Jon Connington is a liability.

Of course wars will always kill more or less innocents, children, women, men, they are all human beings. A war is legitimate only if it resolves a greater evil. Not for the hubris of anyone.

Concerning the monarchies, I don't know. The Free Folks have disdain for the kneelers. And I read more or less: allegiance = slavery. If you agree with your leader, you obey by your own will. You don't need oaths. Oaths are only requested from rebels and traitors. If you disagree, you assume your responsibilities, possibly to the cost of your life. Slavery or monarchy, it is more a question of how good for you is your master. But in no case you are free.

If Jon is the future king, I would expect it will be different monarchy system. After all the horrors it went thru, Westeros deserves better. If he is not, I expect he will find someone suitable.

[Masha]

2 hours ago, Cas Stark said:

This may be accurate, but I'm still of the opinion that GRRM sees her as a flawed hero, she's Tywin 'fire and blood' without the excess helping of cruelty.  The dragon does not plant.  So, she may not be equipped to rule Westeros, but she is well equipped to "save" it from the Others.

I might have said she would die once, but now I think Jon will be the one to die at the end, along with the wolves, dragons, and 2 or 3 more Starks.  

I actually think that she will die, she will fight the Others, win but not survive. Her type of story, following literaly tropes, supposes her winning, surviving and getting all she wants. GRRM thing will be to get her close but then die.

I think GRRM trick with Jon will be to give him all his daydreams that he had as a bastard growing up at WF and playing those games with Robb - where Robb wanted to be the King and Jon wanted to be Lord of WF and a King too. But at the same time, Jon will lose so much - all his loved ones - Ygritte, his father and Robb, and most likely Arya, and Bran and/or Rickon, most of his friends - Ed and possibly Sam. So he would be all alone and he would get what he once dreamed of to be King of all Westeros, but he no longer would want it anymore, all he would want is to go back home and have his family once again, but it will be all gone. And all he has to look forward to is power play, politics, manipulations and holding everything together.

 

[Lord Estermont]

Your points are very accurate and correct IMO, Danny hasnt proved herself as the rightful ruler of anything yet. Her childish decisions , beliefs and fantasies will be disastrous for Westeros , should she ever arrive there alive. Someone should kill her and her dragons before its too late. Truly a madmans daughter

[Shierak Qiya]

On 5/30/2016 at 9:18 AM, Lord Vance II said:

First off, let's look at Dany's possible invasion force. It consists of eunick (sp?) slave soldiers (not slaves anymore but what difference does that make to Westerosi?), PROBABLY Dothraki, Ironborn and Essosi mercenaries. Its like a whos-who of people who would terrify the Westerosi smallfolk..not to mention the dragons. What leader would unleash Dothraki on her own people? 

Speaking of the smallfolk, Dany has no upside for them. As has been said many times in the books, smallfolk don't really give a shit who is on the throne as long as their crops come in and their children have a future. There are no chains to break, they're as free as peasants can be. All Dany has to offer is another round of fire and blood, more lost crops, more dead sons and fathers, more raped mothers and daughters. I think Dany expects to smallfolk to flock to her...and I think "the dragon" will be awakened when they don't like they did in Slaves Bay. 

I don't think any of the greathouses would bend the knee to Dany, the daughter of the Mad King who has made her goal their demise. Could the combined might of Westeros stop Dany and her army? Maybe (I hope so) but probably not. Though dragons aren't quite as terrifying as they were during Aegon's Conquest because Dany's aren't nearly as large and people now know that they can be killed. 

Add to that the fact that she has proved to be a terrible ruler. Slavers bay is a disaster because of her. Her obsession with stamping out slavers is certainly honorable, but with no alternative shes basically freeing slaves to a life of squalor and even further marginalization. The masters still have all the property, all the wealth, all the power. The smallfolk have freedom and not much else. Her cities are rife with crime and injustice. The situation is different in Westeros, but if she can't keep one city in order how could she rule a massive continent without just burning all who oppose her (Aerys style)

The best hope for Westeros is if Aegon (who I believe is the real deal) is able to unite Westeros (or at least southern Westeros) against her and attack her as she tries to land through the dragon fire. But at this point, with the countryside trying to recover from the War of 5 Kings, a bad winter coming and the dead along with it, Dany is the last think Westeros needs. Though it plays into my belief that the "winner" of the Game of Thrones will have a hollow victory, dominion over a pile of ash. 

(I know she will most likely be key to the defeat of the Others, and it might win her big points, but she would have to wait until the North was totally overrun for people in the south to really care since they believe its a bunch of Northern nonsense anyways.

Thoughts?

I don't agree with you.  Most of the great houses will side with Daenerys as soon as she sets foot on Westeros.  She has a reputation for ending slavery.  She will take the Dothraki, a big cog in the wheel of the slave trade, and use them to end slavery.  The common folk and most of the non-great houses in the South are sick and tired of the war of the Lannisters and the Starks.  I think they will embrace the return of the Targaryen dynasty, especially when Dany lands with three legendary symbol of House Targaryen, the dragons. 

From a military point of view, it should be an easy "conquest" for Dany.  That is assuming there is even a need to fight at all.  Winter has arrived and there is no one else who has the answer to stop the white walkers.  Westeros cannot grow its own food for the duration of the long night.  They clearly will need the one person who can send food from Essos to Westeros.  The most important reason Westeros will side with Dany is because she is the most competent person on a list that includes Jon, Euron, Stannis, and Sansa. 

 

[Leticia Stark]

I think she'll die in the war against the WW's. Like someone said here, I feel like George is setting her up for a big failure.

[Brianstorm]

24 minutes ago, Leticia Stark said:

I think she'll die in the war against the WW's. Like someone said here, I feel like George is setting her up for a big failure.

He's making her do the wrong things for the right reasons, and this will continue in war-torn Westeros. Only problem is Westeros doesn't have any literal slaves and the people don't have the time for semantics right now.

[Lost Time]

I'm rooting against Dany because I hate these incestual "keep the blood pure" Targaryans and I hate dragons. I also don't like that she's intent on bringing a horde of monsters (dragons and Dothraki) to tear up the continent because she feels entitled to rule a realm she knows little and less about. But her help would be appreciated against the Others and their wrights of course.

 

Then again, I'm one of those "Free North" types so I don't really care who sits on the Iron Throne as long as the King (or queen) of the North is able to keep their title and country. Being apart of the united kingdom of Westeros hasn't really done much for the North anyways. Hell, they lost a chunk of land for it and most times they've been involved in Southern politics, they've paid mightily for it with little benefit to show.

[Sourjapes]

I am not rooting against Dany, but I will be very disappointed if her conquest of the Seven Kingdoms is clean, without her having to confront the fact that even her own armies will rape and murder and pillage, destroying lives. I want her as well to face the fact, if she uses her dragons to roast enemy hosts, that she'll be reinging over the same people who's son and fathers she put the sword. War and conquest are bloody and brutal and somebody with Dany's heart ought to have a hard time feeling like a hero.

[khal drogon]

Why people who say Dany shouldn't get the throne because Targs lost it don't oppose Aegon VI in the same way? All I see people talk about is that Aegon will bring peace or he would rule well. Also why few people who oppose Dany with the same arguments are okay with Jon taking the throne? I don't see the same kind of hostility towards them. I am okay if people oppose Dany if they feel she would make a poor ruler in comparison. But using the argument that "Targs lost the rule because of Aerys" against Dany and dreaming of Jon getting the throne. I see people of Jon the legitimate heir crowd having this hypocrisy. 

[NutBurz]

Deep down I think most people who take a side against her can´t stand the sight of a strong Westerosi woman.

By the way, does anyone really believe the Dothraki are worst than the Westerosi when it comes to raping and pillaging? We read a huge number of atrocities during the war of the five kings; and violent as they might be, they "fight clean". No Red Weddings. So I have to question this notion that they´re filthy barbarians. I also don´t think most of the Dothraki would stay in westeros forever, and I don´t think Danny plans to do that, after she´s seen what khalassars do to civilization after long periods. 

[khal drogon]

What I am sick of is people do not give credit for what she has done in Meereen. She actually tried all she could to rule well there. The primary problem there with her trying to change a culture that was deep rooted. This happened because of the cultural differences between her and them. She did more than she should in that situation. But I am sick of seeing people paint that as incompetence and use that as an argument against her ruling Westeros. How is Slavers Bay's problems in any way similar to Westeros? It is a lot easier to rule Westeros than Slavers Bay. That's why I want her to leave Westeros after what happens at the end if she is alive because I could see her rule well there  if she really commits to it. Let Westeros goes to Sansa or whoever, Dany should rule where she could really make a change. 

[BalerionTheCat]

3 hours ago, khal drogon said:

Why people who say Dany shouldn't get the throne because Targs lost it don't oppose Aegon VI in the same way? All I see people talk about is that Aegon will bring peace or he would rule well. Also why few people who oppose Dany with the same arguments are okay with Jon taking the throne? I don't see the same kind of hostility towards them. I am okay if people oppose Dany if they feel she would make a poor ruler in comparison. But using the argument that "Targs lost the rule because of Aerys" against Dany and dreaming of Jon getting the throne. I see people of Jon the legitimate heir crowd having this hypocrisy. 

I don't care what is the family name of the ruler. If Aegon is the true son of Rhaegar, a Blackfyre by his mother, or the son of the first whore with violet eyes and silver hairs. Daenerys could be the lost daughter of Ned Stark, it would change nothing. What I care is the consequence for the people.

It seems to me (the future will tell) that Aegon could bring peace to Westeros. All is artificial and will not last, but Varys and Illrio made him, has a breed horse, from what they know of what is necessary to win people: to be humble, pious, just, compassionate... I'm not for him for the End Game, but I believe he would be a fair king.

1 hour ago, khal drogon said:

What I am sick of is people do not give credit for what she has done in Meereen. She actually tried all she could to rule well there. The primary problem there with her trying to change a culture that was deep rooted. This happened because of the cultural differences between her and them. She did more than she should in that situation. But I am sick of seeing people paint that as incompetence and use that as an argument against her ruling Westeros. How is Slavers Bay's problems in any way similar to Westeros? It is a lot easier to rule Westeros than Slavers Bay. That's why I want her to leave Westeros after what happens at the end if she is alive because I could see her rule well there  if she really commits to it. Let Westeros goes to Sansa or whoever, Dany should rule where she could really make a change. 

I agree Daenerys wants to do good. But her actions lead to catastrophes. Astapor is destroyed. There was not just slavers there. The Pale Mare is unlashed. Deaths beyond count. And sorry, but there is no obvious long term improvement for Meereen and elsewhere in the Slaver's Bay. Everything resumes as before or worst when she leaves. Because people don't understand and share what she wants.

And my perception is, she will bring as much mayhem to Westeros, with her Dothrakis and sellswords of various repute. With Red Priests burning people and opposing the Faith in her name, with Euron and his Ironborns joining the carnage. Maybe the Pale Mare too. And whatever evil Euron can have in store. Maybe all this will not happen, but it is how it looks to me.

[khal drogon]

11 minutes ago, BalerionTheCat said:

I don't care what is the family name of the ruler. If Aegon is the true son of Rhaegar, a Blackfyre by his mother, or the son of the first whore with violet eyes and silver hairs. Daenerys could be the lost daughter of Ned Stark, it would change nothing. What I care is the consequence for the people.

It seems to me (the future will tell) that Aegon could bring peace to Westeros. All is artificial and will not last, but Varys and Illrio made him, has a breed horse, from what they know of what is necessary to win people: to be humble, pious, just, compassionate... I'm not for him for the End Game, but I believe he would be a fair king.

I agree Daenerys wants to do good. But her actions lead to catastrophes. Astapor is destroyed. There was not just slavers there. The Pale Mare is unlashed. Deaths beyond count. And sorry, but there is no obvious long term improvement for Meereen and elsewhere in the Slaver's Bay. Everything resumes as before or worst when she leaves. Because people don't understand and share what she wants.

And my perception is, she will bring as much mayhem to Westeros, with her Dothrakis and sellswords of various repute. With Red Priests burning people and opposing the Faith in her name, with Euron and his Ironborns joining the carnage. Maybe the Pale Mare too. And whatever evil Euron can have in store. Maybe all this will not happen, but it is how it looks to me.

Are you of the opinion that Targaryens lost the rule? If not it is not directed at you. 

Personally I don't like the idea of Aegon. He seems more like a puppet to me. I don't have a great faith in Varys & Illyrio too. I don't believe he has the things to be a good king. But he will have a good PR and his peace will not be something achieved by himself but achieved by Varys playing his game. Even if he ascends the throne I find it distasteful because Varys and Illyrio's actions.

As for Slavers Bay's problems there is no magic wand to solve it. Her actions have resulted in good or bad remains to be seen. I am talking about her trying to achieve a peace and she kinda did till Drogon ruined everything.

In Westeros, I could see Westeros seeing her as a bad guy. But I don't see her intentionally causing mayhem. It will be like how people of KL thought about Tyrion. Also Euron is setup as her big antagonist. I don't see her joining with him.

[BalerionTheCat]

31 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

Are you of the opinion that Targaryens lost the rule? If not it is not directed at you.

I'm of the opinion the rule belongs to no one. Some take it, as a robber broke into a house, to steal something. So technically, I would say Robert took it by defeating the Targaryens. And Daenerys could take it back by defeating whoever holds the IT. But I would approve neither. Winning a war doesn't make of you the right leader. Maybe things will never change. I expect GRRM will devise something better, but it is a far far shot.

32 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

In Westeros, I could see Westeros seeing her as a bad guy. But I don't see her intentionally causing mayhem. It will be like how people of KL thought about Tyrion. Also Euron is setup as her big antagonist. I don't see her joining with him.

For Euron, and probably the Red Priests business, I don't expect she will like it. Neither the worst of invasion business. I believe the show is exaggerating her hatred, but I don't know by how much. The result will not be good anyway.

But I see Euron as far more dangerous that anyone, much more than her and her dragons. And I didn't wait the last TWOW chapter to think so. He will not leave her any choice.

[lojzelote]

19 hours ago, Masha said:

I actually think that she will die, she will fight the Others, win but not survive. Her type of story, following literaly tropes, supposes her winning, surviving and getting all she wants. GRRM thing will be to get her close but then die.

I think GRRM trick with Jon will be to give him all his daydreams that he had as a bastard growing up at WF and playing those games with Robb - where Robb wanted to be the King and Jon wanted to be Lord of WF and a King too. But at the same time, Jon will lose so much - all his loved ones - Ygritte, his father and Robb, and most likely Arya, and Bran and/or Rickon, most of his friends - Ed and possibly Sam. So he would be all alone and he would get what he once dreamed of to be King of all Westeros, but he no longer would want it anymore, all he would want is to go back home and have his family once again, but it will be all gone. And all he has to look forward to is power play, politics, manipulations and holding everything together.

 

Jon never wanted to a king, he wanted to be a general/conqueror/warrior/the Lord of WF (the last one only because his father was one).

I do wonder though where readers' trust in his leadership abilities comes from. His role as the LC ended disastrously, and who knows what happens at the Wall now when he got himself killed. Probably another Meereen. Not to mention, for a guy who actually grew up in Westeros and had the best possible education, he doesn't seem very learned - like, in AGoT he didn't even recognize the arms of a major Reach House such as Tarly.

I don't think he's the worst choice by any measure, because I believe he still has time to learn, but so does Dany. It's annoying how quickly people write her off over a beginner's mistakes, but already almost paint Jon as the next Conciliator, lol.

Anyhow, if he ends up as the king, I hope it will be at least in part because of his own ambition. There's no worse cliche than a guy who doesn't want to become the king, but is forced to become one anyway and then rules wisely for the next fifty years. My old and saggy arse, why would anybody choose as the king someone who's uninterested in what comes with the position? Would such a person make it into the top management of a modern international company? Most likely not. No, the guy (or gal) who sits the throne must be driven, ambitious, resourceful, purposeful, assertive. Otherwise the Realm may end up with another Robert or Aerys the First.

[TheWhiteDevil]

I am rooting for Dani. And completely agree with khal Drogon's posts"

I do find the majority of "rooting against" Dani's post biased and unfair.

However I am biased as well. I also love the Targaryen's lore beyond words while I am only mildly interested in the other Houses. Would not be sad should they disappear. I'm not wishing for it though.

if I were a middle class Westerosi living in current Westeros I would welcome Daenerys.

[Lord Vance II]

On 6/4/2016 at 3:08 AM, NutBurz said:

I also don´t think most of the Dothraki would stay in westeros forever, and I don´t think Danny plans to do that, after she´s seen what khalassars do to civilization after long periods. 

She absolutely could not allow any Dothraki to stay in Westeros, not that I think many would want to stay. You can't have a nomadic tribe of raiders as part of your kingdom, it's guaranteed to create problems. A handful might stay and settle down, but not many. 

On 6/4/2016 at 4:19 AM, khal drogon said:

What I am sick of is people do not give credit for what she has done in Meereen. She actually tried all she could to rule well there. The primary problem there with her trying to change a culture that was deep rooted. 

I would say few in here doubt her intentions. She has a noble cause, but she just isn't up to it. Destroying slavery is great, but you have to have something for them to turn to and she didn't have the experience to think it through. She's had it drilled into her for her whole life that she has to have an army, so shes thrown together a force without really thinking about who shes bringing into her camp. 

Part of her problem is poor council. People like Jorah, Barristan, Daario and Belwas are not big picture people. Barristan and Jorah made their names following others orders. Belwas has never led. Daario has leadership experience but definitely not the same thing. They may be loyal as all get out, but they just don't have the high-level experience she needs in her council. She does get Tyrion, but for precious little time before being whisked off on dragon's wings. 

Her age and lack of experience is also a factor I think GRRM has made a point to show that experience is key and lack there of is deadly. Leaders under the age of 20 or so have fared very badly. 

- Robb was brilliant in the field but lost the war and his life because he didn't understand the politics and ruthless enemies he was dealing with.

- Jon makes the decisions he thinks are right, ends up getting gutted by his own men.

- Jeoffry was a little sh*t. 

- Marcella is the figurehead of a failed revolution. 

- Sweetrobin is pretty much a pawn marked for death. 

- Theon's turned on by his own men and ends up being really, really f*cked. 

- Tommen is a figurehead as his regime crumbles. 

Whether it's their fault or not, young leaders almost always fail. Granted, Robert and Ned were in their late teens when they overthrew a dynasty (I think). Dany was taught to seek revenge and bring fire and blood, not to rule. She has been surrounded by what amount to yes men throughout her campaigns with no real teaching. She's passionate and has good intentions, but she doesn't know how to do it without violence. 

[the wolf that never was]

Quote

I would say few in here doubt her intentions. She has a noble cause, but she just isn't up to it. Destroying slavery is great, but you have to have something for them to turn to and she didn't have the experience to think it through. She's had it drilled into her for her whole life that she has to have an army, so shes thrown together a force without really thinking about who shes bringing into her camp. 

exactly removing slavery is all good but there needs to be new economic structure if she is going to destroy the existing structure for the people to live a bettter life or it fall into chaos and society crumbles eg. Mereen

2 hours ago, Lord Vance II said:

 

 

Part of her problem is poor council. People like Jorah, Barristan, Daario and Belwas are not big picture people. Barristan and Jorah made their names following others orders. Belwas has never led. Daario has leadership experience but definitely not the same thing. They may be loyal as all get out, but they just don't have the high-level experience she needs in her council. She does get Tyrion, but for precious little time before being whisked off on dragon's wings. 

She has been surrounded by what amount to yes men throughout her campaigns with no real teaching. She's passionate and has good intentions, but she doesn't know how to do it without violence. 

I dont hate Dany. She is a fundamentally a good person and actually it is my opinion shed be perfect for the IT because with seasoned, wise and no BS council (eg.tyrion) shed be a very good ruler but another problem is her upbringing and and the fact that her head has been filled with misconception by Viserys (eg. she think the starks,arryns and tullys are just usurper's dogs and cant differentiate between them even though they are vastly different houses). She needs to be taught the truth and clear her head of that poisonous self entitlement and misconceptions about westeros and Taught what is prudential. She is trying to do the right thing but despite her dragons,her army and targaryan name she hasnt been able to do anything because she just doesn't know HOW.

Another thing I agree with is that uptil now she was surrounded by YES men(Barristan Selmy for example i love that guy but He is such a yes man eg.mad king burns and strangles starks he does and says nothing) who never taught her what was right even when she was wrong and because of that she needs Tyrion more than he needs her if she is to keep focus on her righteous path or shes soon going to be tumbling down a darker  steep path much followed by (50%)targaryans before her and we dont know if she will ever get the chance to climb up again before its too late