What will be Dany’s justification for invading Westeros?

[MoIaF]

:bang: :bang: :bang:

GUYS!

Get it together!!!! It's suppose to be a SECRET society. Damn it!

[Kyoshi]

Well, it makes it a lot easier to emphatize and make peace with the surviving rebels and their families. If her father had been a saint, as Viserys probably taught her, peace is a lot less acceptable. It's much easier for hate to flourish then. Hate leads to violence and pragmatism gets thrown out of the window.

When Daenerys learns and accepts the truth, she can allow herself with ease to pardon every rebel lord (with the exception of Tywin, Jaime, Gregor, etc. who were directly involved in the savage murder of Princess Rhaenys and Prince Aegon). That will make it a lot easier for her to achieve her goals and it could curtail the amount of violence. If she invades decrying the usurpers dogs, the Vale for instance will not be very eager to side with her, which means more bloodshed and suffering. If she's willing to make deals with them, she can turn former foe's into allies.

A reveal could also have other positive consequences. First and foremost on Daenerys psyche, if she knows that her father was as mad as a hatter, she'll be much more introspective. If she keeps second-guessing her decisions and wondering about the morality of them, she's much more likely to use her immense power with care.

I can't ague with that. Though I must say, I predict that her interaction with Jaime will not be as expected.

JCRB, agreed.

[Kyoshi]

MOIAF, they already knew. They even knew the name.

[Nictarion]

MOIAF, they already knew. They even knew the name.

We have a Jorah among us. *looks around suspiciously*

[JonCon's Red Beard]

Our Khaleesi flag is gold and white...

The haters see it black and blue.

[Kyoshi]

I suspect Patrick Stormborn is the Jorah. He hasn't been to a single cult...I mean party meeting I ages.

JCRB, that stupid dress, man. I see white and gold.

[MoIaF]

MOIAF, they already knew. They even knew the name.

We have a Jorah among us. *looks around suspiciously*

WHAT!!!! This is unacceptable. We need to get this rat out of brainwashing institution.... I mean club.

I suspect Patrick Stormborn is the Jorah. He hasn't been to a single cult...I mean party meeting I ages.

JCRB, that stupid dress, man. I see white and gold.

Our Khaleesi flag is gold and white...

The haters see it black and blue.

I hate that faux white and gold dress, what madness has taken us all!

[Mithras]

I love how you always manage too argue against yourself.

Robert derived his throne from being a long lost Targ descendant. It is even suggested in AGOT, that had Ned been a shrewder man, he would have taken the throne for himself. Yet he says to his old friend Bobby, that he [bob] had the better claim because he had the blood, albeit diluted, of the dragon. Furthermore, Robert did nothing to upturn the laws that had been in place during Targ rule, absolute jack. In essence, Bobby did not create a new dynasty at all, he continued the old Targ one. The one thing he should have done to complete a successful coup would have been to kill Dany and Vis while they were still kids and not allow them to threaten his security at all. He failed, dismally so. In the end he was just a seat warmer. He failed to "illegitimise" Dany and Vis. And if his heirs can be legal, then so should the offspring of the old dead mad king i.e. Daenerys and Viserys...and any legitimate offspring of that offspring i.e. your favourite Targ-infected character--Jon. That is assuming of course, the unlikely scenario that Jon is even legal at all.

Sadly, it is you who argue against own self. You are clearly unaware of what really happened. You say that Robert only became king because of his Targaryen blood (which is completely against the text and SSM btw) but at the same time you seem to be aware that Ned (who had no Targaryen ancestry AFAWK) could have been the king too if he chose so.

Jon Arryn persuaded Robert that sending assassins after Dany and Viserys was not the right thing to do. Apart from being dishonorable, it was also against the soul of their rebellion. They rebelled against a mad king in order to save their own heads but after being successful, there was no justification to kill his young children in exile.

And Robert never failed to “delegitimize” Viserys and Dany.

Now seeing as Robert never meant to overthrow the old rule, so to speak, but to simply claim it for himself, it can be concluded that his uprising was an illegal one.

Logic and you are not good friends, my friend. WTF is this supposed to mean?

That's assuming, of course, that the question of blood is a significant one at all. If we are all reading these books just so in the end the "rightful heir" can rule the world, then maybe the author has not achieved what I believe he intended. Surely thrones are more than the seats of people with certain blood, and only because they have that "special" blood, without any other merit to support their claim. I find it quite primitive that we are all basically arguing over which of our favourite characters deserves the throne simply because of something as [insert any word that undermines the glorification of inheritance-based rule even in instances where such rule has proven useless and often, as is the case with ASOIAF, catastrophic for those being ruled] as blood. Quite frankly, it should not matter if in the end Young Griff, Tommen or Arianne sits on that dreadful thing. The only thing that should matter is if this designated person can actually do a decent job while placing his/her ass there. And that's assuming, of course, that the throne will not be proven irrelevant.

I wouldn't even care if Stannis sat there, just so long as he didn't burn people or chop off their fingers or send shadow babies to kill them. Hell, even Jaime/LF/Varys/whoever can sit there. Anyone really. Just do a decent job.

Lol, agree with the bolded and that exactly the reason why Dany should never be allowed a thousand leagues near the IT, considering her CV as a ruler.

:bowdown: Your dedication to this cause is astounding.

I certainly don't expect consistency from her since I learnt a long time ago that she is a realistically-written character.

You said that the person on the IT should do a decent job. Now you say that you do not expect consistency from Dany. I think we can all agree that a ruler should be consistent. Or is this asking too much?

Even from you, Paper Waver, I have seen nothing but inconsistency in your convictions. What you detest in her, you gladly overlook in others. I am not stating that we should forgive her crimes simply because there exist bigger monsters, only that we should not be hypocrites while we so self-righteously pass judgement.

I honestly believe you need to pass the torch of your vitriol to someone with a fresh set of arguments. Your poorly reasoned ones are getting old.

This thread is full of Dany whitewashing which proves the irrational Dany worship. Maybe it is time for you to do more rereads to come up with new ways to whitewash Dany because they are getting old pretty fast.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

Dany's new pets

[Suzanna Stormborn]

Our Khaleesi flag is gold and white...

The haters see it black and blue.

LOL OMG. Fuck that stupid dress, I cannot believe how stupid that stupid fucking dress is.

This thread is full of Dany whitewashing which proves the irrational Dany worship. Maybe it is time for you to do more rereads to come up with new ways to whitewash Dany because they are getting old pretty fast.

Look we already established over several pages that this whitewashing and worship is a figment of your imagination (along with a few other posters). We asked and asked for even one example of this so-called whitewashingworship and NO ONE ever presented even one example. So I mean, keep flinging out this same line over and over (because it never gets boring or redundant or insane), you have lost the argument, everyone knows it, everyone knows this thread is based off incorrect info. Dany does not consider her entry into Westeros an invasion, only you do.

We know all this because there have been no examples posted, but on the other hand, there have been plenty of examples of unwarranted, incorrect Dany-bashing that is not anywhere in the text, only in the minds of the posters.

[Mithras]

Here's some, just to name a few. Still waiting on you to prove your claim though.

From the posts you quoted and bolded, it is clear that according to you, irrational Dany hatred is any criticism of Dany you don’t agree with. Again this proves the sheer amount of irrational Dany worship in this thread.

[Steve Stark]

I am much more interested in trying to figure out where the author is taking the story -- and then trying my best to enjoy the ride. It seems clear to me, based on the overall story structure and numerous clues in the text, that Dany is destined to be one of the endgame heroes (although I admit she might die at the end) and Stannis is destined to die tragically and unfulfilled. These conclusions are not based at all on how much I like or dislike Dany or Stannis. They are based entirely on my analysis of the text (and other sources, like quotes from GRRM). So Dany haters (who expect her to be painted in the end as a villain) and Stannis lovers (who expect him to win the IT) are, in my opinion, simply likely to be sorely disappointed. Now if things turn out differently than I expect I might be disappointed -- but only because I will have failed in analyzing the text correctly (not for any specific preference regarding the fates of individual characters). All I really care about ultimately is whether the series--as a whole--is satisfying. D&D claim the ending is satisfying--I hope I will agree.

I hear you. Well according to that original letter of his that was "leaked" earlier, there are 5 characters he'd decided early on that would make it to the end of the series (of course that could have changed in the last 20 years since other items have altered from his original letter/plot). I've always imagined 3 would at least make it to the end, and that's Jon, Dany, and Tyrion, but who's to say whether they actually live or die at the end? It could go either way, honestly. But I think they'll be there at the final battle, or thereabouts. The 3 "possible survivors" and key players of the story are that way (in my head) because of, like you said, the plot that we've all been studying over the years along with George's statements. Not to mention the R+L=J theory that really strengthens Jon's role in the series.

I've been trying to figure this book out for years, and this forum took it to a whole new level when I joined up. Good times.

[Ser Creighton]

Just curious, since this debate is still going. But when I look at the OP the title asks a question, now in truth it is a question only the author can answer, don't really care if it's called an invasion or anything else by the way. But the OP after asking the question proceeds to answer said question by creating a fallacy of false choices. He then gives you answers to all said choices and all of them essentially end the same. In order to answer his own question the author applied supposition, as in I suppose it will be this or that. Then speculates on the effect in the same black and white thinking and the entire time the OP is really only looking for one thing and it's not an answer to the question in the title. The author answers that for himself in the OP, the author is simply looking for a conformation of bias. He wants his opinion approved of.

But as far as I can tell, we don't have much information to answer said question. When she will come, why she will come, how she will come, who she will come with, and what she will do remain very much up in the air. Whatever side a person leans too neither side can answer that question only Martin can. So basically we once again have a troll thread starting arguments between fans and detractors of a character that is debating unproven or supported speculation. It's nothing more than arguing for the sake of arguing. There is text in the books, and if this really is about hints about what she may or may not do, then people may want to start using the text because that is the information we have. Right now there is a debate over terminology, invasion? Rescue mission. Whatever, she'll come we just don't have much info beyond that. You want to speculate then try using the text to support claims.

Someone requested Jon critisism, well I happen to be a well known fan of Jon's though some theories and posters annoy me with over speculation.

Like with other characters Martin sometimes get lazy with his writing we see this in the case of Mance excepting Jon. Why does he do it because Jon sat at the back table? To his credit he keeps an eye on Jon who he does not fully trust. But then Jon is caught in a possible lie when the Wildlings discover the rangers had been at the fist in force. Yet Jon who had been with Halfhand a senior Ranger has no idea about this. Yiggy clears Jon's name by claiming thye are having sex yet she never addresses the issue herself. Mance excepts the claim as if it is rare for a man of the watch to have sex. Yet we know from the text it is common for men of the watch to frequent the Moles town brothel and Mance was a member of said watch for most of his life and would no this. Yet he sends Jon on a crucial mission that leaves Jon with an easy chance to escape and alert the watch, which he does.

Jon often gets credit for other characters actions. Ghost discovered the Dragonglass and someone else planted it there. Ghost Saved Jon from the Wight in Mormonts chambers and alerted him to it. Sam discovered the use of Dragonglass and what it will and won't work against, he did all the research on Wight's which Jon often cut him off about.

Jon as a commander is short sighted, inexperienced, stubborn and lacks strategic command ability to date. It is Stannis and Noye who won the battle of castle black and the wall. Jon came up with the idea to drop barallels with frozen water in them. That was his big play, and of course it works because Mance showed zero tactical ability with one of the dumbest and most pointless attacks you will ever see.

As a commander he is given information from Mel and for the most part aside from a name Mel is correct in what she tells him. Jon knows she has been right, yet claims she is always wrong because he does not want to listen to her. Making common cause with the Wildlings is a fine move, though he does not seek a balance between the watch and the Wildlings, rather he seeks to order them around with the do everything I say or else perogative. He blackmails the people he says he is rescuing and endentures them to his cause. He takes out a loan with the Iron bank he has no ability to repay. He violates one of the codes of the watch when he knowingly gives advice to Stannis in his war that directly pertains to his war, he often lets emotion cloud his judgment. We see this in both Hardhome and the case of Arya.

His rescue mission consists of sending ships, he questions if he should lead the mission but then takes a nap and at some point decided not to go. He believes ships will be the fastest way to Hardhome. Now we get into his strategy and decision making. The watch had decided to stop using there scout/rangers and with good reason. The primary objective of scout rangers is to observe without being observed. But from book one on the Rangers had been getting slaughtered and or not returning. Royce and his group, Benjen, and then while scouting in force, the great ranging they get slaughtered by the Others and their Wights. Other rangings are listed as well as not returning and the watch is down to a minimal force of 600, most of which are builders and stewards.

Jon has no information on hardhome as there are no rangings, he has no eyes and he ackowledges this. So he decides to make a move start ranging again. What Jon fails to realize is that in order to be taking out the watches rangings something must be observing them which means his rangers are sitting ducks. So he sends out three, three man ranging teams against better advice. But does not order a recon of Hardhome, simple ranger teams with ravens. Jon's plan for Hardhome is simple send ships save the day. But he does not have the ships, so asks the Bank of Braavos for help, 3 of Stannis' ships also return and Jon takes them though they are not fit for sea and need a refit. He has other ships seized as wel land then has to wait for good weather. All of these are delays. Jon had Val and Wildlings, Val unlike the Rangers proved capable of going north of the wall and returning. Why not send the Wildlings by land from Eastwatch, it would be slow but they don't need near the amount of time the ships need to prepare for the mission not to mention his master of ships seems think this is a bad plan and this is a man who helped Jon get elected. Also a base force of Wildlings would be able to communicate better with the other Wildlings than the Watch. You also gain the ability to send the Giants by land and while not fast they can sure as hell give an enemy pause. Hardhome turns out to be what it appears to be a trap. After all the Others seem very intent on luring out the Rangers who seem a primary target for them and also seem to be observing them. Jon would not know about Royce but he would know about Benjen and his men, the fist and Crasters.

The watch has a primary goal defend the realm from the Others. Now for some reason the early watch proved capable of doing this with one castle and one secret door. Jon has yet to realize that. The mission to hard home ends in failure, and Mel informs him they are all dead, but Jon claims she is always wrong although she was right about a girl in grey, dark wings dark words and the rangings. Jon plans a second mission to Hardhome this time by land. Why? To play the hero? Once again next to no intel other than the Wights are there and everyone is dying. It's not that hard to imagine Mel is correct though it is for Jon. But Jon gets a nasty letter and gets angry. So instead of good judgment he decides he must march south to war with Ramsey and still send a force to Hardhome, thus stripping the wall he is sworn to defend of most of it's defenders. Ramsey was not real threat to the watch, a simple look out the window informs you why. It has been snowing for weeks, there are no roads, and it is snowing again. Common sense tells you it would take Ramsey an extremely long time to march some 700 miles north with no road, extreme weather conditions, and very heavy amounts of snow fall and snow on the ground. Jon even expressed these ideas when thinking about the relief mission to Hardhome. As a reader we are also privy to see what the weather did to Stannis and his men. They were slowed, supplied dwindled men were dying and starving and that was from Deepwood to the outpost. His force could barely move. Jon would subject his force to these same conditions, give up shelter and warmth, give himself a long logistics tail and march an inferior force 700 miles south to a enemy with a superior force in one of the most highly defendable fortresses in the world. Pretty much giving his enemy every advantage in the world. Now Ramsey on the other hand would be subject to the same dangers we saw with Stannis and would be marching on an enemy that has time to prepare, recon south, and pick the field of battle all from a sheltered and well supplied position. But no he was angry so suicide mission south and take away all the people you just got to help you defend the wall from the real enemy. He also wants to devide his forces and send more people to Hardhom, taking away yet more defenders, and sending them on yet another suicide mission against better advice. Some people think this march north and south would have succeeded but as of to date no force sent North of the wall has succeeded something else Jon has not noticed or considered.

Bowen may have been wrong in what he did but he also may have saved many lives from Jon's emotion based choices. Jon should of been spending his time sending out Wildlings to bring in as many Wildlings as possible. There are very few members of the watch, and the Wildlings know the north better than they do. If the Others are at Hardhome then send your Wildlings out from Shadow tower to recruit as many as they can. You have to decide who you can and can't save. We know where the Wildlings are gathering near Shadow Tower, send out the Thenns and Tormund and some of his best men, save who can. Don't toss away people on two obvious traps that have no chance of success. You don't have the ability to observe your enemy or intel north, so you need speed, nothing past 30 miles men and spear wives on horses, first sign of danger you run and you run fast.

Jon has done no break down with his people on the ability and Dangers of the Others and the Wights. You have any enemy with no known CoG, no logistics tail, the elemets work to their strengths and against you, they don't fatigue, they are observing the watch, they are baiting them into traps, they did it with Royce, they did it with Mormont, they did it at the fist and they are doing it at Hardhome. Because they have no logistic tail and do not fatigue and the weather works for them they can beat you with maneuver warfare, and clearly attrition works for them. They have superior recon ability, they can not only use the Wight's which are expendable they can use Wighted animals and the ability to Wight animals was observed at the fist. Yet no consideration that they are capable of watching you using anything from a bird to a mouse. He never debriefs Tormund or the other Wildlings on the Wights, yet claims he is looking for intel. He sends Sam away but nobody including himself continues to look at the watches library most of which is unexplored for more intel. If you can't gain intel from scouting and observation than your only options are anything you can get from the Wildlings and history. Here is a guy that has done very little reading on his enemy and has spoken little about the Others with the Wildlings, Tormund and mance give him some small insight but he does not seek any support or further intel.

Jon claims he is really worried about the Others but the first excuse he got to leave after Hardhome he used. He is not prepared for unexpected developments under the fog of war and acts impulsivly and emotionally to said developments. Is Stannis really dead? You are sitting at your base of operations with a small army of raiders, send some south to investigate the truth. They will be moving much faster than any major force Ramsey planned on using to march north. Where is the naturally occuring OODA loop? Observe, Orient, Decide, Act. Jon has problems with the first, skips the second, bases the third off emotion and then decides. A simple operations process from Jon who happens to be strategic command. He is a very likable person at times, but he really does know nothing and is doing little to educate himself rather he tries to enforce that everyone be more like him. Cause he knows, he is 16 and has it all figured out. He gave next to no consideration to the men he sent to their deaths on the first Hardhome mission. Emotionally disconnected from his people, ignorant to command, advice, strategy and tactics, easy to anger and makes to many choices based on personal emotion and desire. Both Jon and Dany stuggle with their early commands and or ruling, both struggle with being both disconnected from those around them, various forms of depression, are affraid to trust many around them, are stubborn, both seem rather intelligent, both are charasmatic, Dany appears to be far better at tactics and strategy and Jon appears to be better at negotiation.

I can pick most young leaders apart, but I think that is one of the reasons they both become more believable and better reads for me. Neither is a Mary Sue, young leaders should struggle with leadership and go through emotional extremes of highs an lows, they should make bad choices they have no experience, they are both subject to fuck ups and fucking up. Leadership and war and resposibility is hard god damn work and for a couple of teenagers I think they are coming along, though both need to play to their strengths more and aknowledge their weaknesses and mistakes. Which of course young leaders often do. Both made a classic mistake while struggling with comprimise in Dance, Dany comprimises to much with the slavers, and Jon does the same with the Wildlings. The Wall comes first, it's what stands between the World and the Others. Not Ramsey, not Stannis who went south, not Hardhome, not Benjen. You save who can when you can, and you make the hard call with intelligence, logic and ration not emotion, that includes both of them. Emotion will get you sometimes and effect anyone but you got to fight when it comes to certain command choices.

[Mithras]

Look we already established over several pages that this whitewashing and worship is a figment of your imagination (along with a few other posters). We asked and asked for even one example of this so-called whitewashingworship and NO ONE ever presented even one example. So I mean, keep flinging out this same line over and over (because it never gets boring or redundant or insane), you have lost the argument, everyone knows it, everyone knows this thread is based off incorrect info. Dany does not consider her entry into Westeros an invasion, only you do.

We know all this because there have been no examples posted, but on the other hand, there have been plenty of examples of unwarranted, incorrect Dany-bashing that is not anywhere in the text, only in the minds of the posters.

You only need to look at the mirror to see the example you asked. I would certainly not like it if a person defended my favorite character like you defend Dany. I think you do more harm to Dany while defending her.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

From the posts you quoted and bolded, it is clear that according to you, irrational Dany hatred is any criticism of Dany you don’t agree with. Again this proves the sheer amount of irrational Dany worship in this thread.

OK, whatever you say. I am an irrational worshiper because I dont blame Dany for bringing down the wall (which hasn't happened). Your foot is very far in your mouth right now.

Please keep making these wonderful threads, they get more wonderful all the time.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

You only need to look at the mirror to see the example you asked. I would certainly not like it if a person defended my favorite character like you defend Dany. I think you do more harm to Dany while defending her.

Which is why you still have not given one example. I don't mind you saying this about me, just quote the posts, the many irrational worshiping posts, why is that so hard to do? Man I don't even have to try to win these arguments, you do it for me. Thank you and goodnight.

[Mithras]

Just curious, since this debate is still going. But when I look at the OP the title asks a question, now in truth it is a question only the author can answer, don't really care if it's called an invasion or anything else by the way. But the OP after asking the question proceeds to answer said question by creating a fallacy of false choices. He then gives you answers to all said choices and all of them essentially end the same. In order to answer his own question the author applied supposition, as in I suppose it will be this or that. Then speculates on the effect in the same black and white thinking and the entire time the OP is really only looking for one thing and it's not an answer to the question in the title. The author answers that for himself in the OP, the author is simply looking for a conformation of bias. He wants his opinion approved of.

But as far as I can tell, we don't have much information to answer said question. When she will come, why she will come, how she will come, who she will come with, and what she will do remain very much up in the air. Whatever side a person leans too neither side can answer that question only Martin can. So basically we once again have a troll thread starting arguments between fans and detractors of a character that is debating unproven or supported speculation. It's nothing more than arguing for the sake of arguing. There is text in the books, and if this really is about hints about what she may or may not do, then people may want to start using the text because that is the information we have. Right now there is a debate over terminology, invasion? Rescue mission. Whatever, she'll come we just don't have much info beyond that. You want to speculate then try using the text to support claims.

Someone requested Jon critisism, well I happen to be a well known fan of Jon's though some theories and posters annoy me with over speculation.

Like with other characters Martin sometimes get lazy with his writing we see this in the case of Mance excepting Jon. Why does he do it because Jon sat at the back table? To his credit he keeps an eye on Jon who he does not fully trust. But then Jon is caught in a possible lie when the Wildlings discover the rangers had been at the fist in force. Yet Jon who had been with Halfhand a senior Ranger has no idea about this. Yiggy clears Jon's name by claiming thye are having sex yet she never addresses the issue herself. Mance excepts the claim as if it is rare for a man of the watch to have sex. Yet we know from the text it is common for men of the watch to frequent the Moles town brothel and Mance was a member of said watch for most of his life and would no this. Yet he sends Jon on a crucial mission that leaves Jon with an easy chance to escape and alert the watch, which he does.

Jon often gets credit for other characters actions. Ghost discovered the Dragonglass and someone else planted it there. Ghost Saved Jon from the Wight in Mormonts chambers and alerted him to it. Sam discovered the use of Dragonglass and what it will and won't work against, he did all the research on Wight's which Jon often cut him off about.

Jon as a commander is short sighted, inexperienced, stubborn and lacks strategic command ability to date. It is Stannis and Noye who won the battle of castle black and the wall. Jon came up with the idea to drop barallels with frozen water in them. That was his big play, and of course it works because Mance showed zero tactical ability with one of the dumbest and most pointless attacks you will ever see.

As a commander he is given information from Mel and for the most part aside from a name Mel is correct in what she tells him. Jon knows she has been right, yet claims she is always wrong because he does not want to listen to her. Making common cause with the Wildlings is a fine move, though he does not seek a balance between the watch and the Wildlings, rather he seeks to order them around with the do everything I say or else perogative. He blackmails the people he says he is rescuing and endentures them to his cause. He takes out a loan with the Iron bank he has no ability to repay. He violates one of the codes of the watch when he knowingly gives advice to Stannis in his war that directly pertains to his war, he often lets emotion cloud his judgment. We see this in both Hardhome and the case of Arya.

His rescue mission consists of sending ships, he questions if he should lead the mission but then takes a nap and at some point decided not to go. He believes ships will be the fastest way to Hardhome. Now we get into his strategy and decision making. The watch had decided to stop using there scout/rangers and with good reason. The primary objective of scout rangers is to observe without being observed. But from book one on the Rangers had been getting slaughtered and or not returning. Royce and his group, Benjen, and then while scouting in force, the great ranging they get slaughtered by the Others and their Wights. Other rangings are listed as well as not returning and the watch is down to a minimal force of 600, most of which are builders and stewards.

Jon has no information on hardhome as there are no rangings, he has no eyes and he ackowledges this. So he decides to make a move start ranging again. What Jon fails to realize is that in order to be taking out the watches rangings something must be observing them which means his rangers are sitting ducks. So he sends out three, three man ranging teams against better advice. But does not order a recon of Hardhome, simple ranger teams with ravens. Jon's plan for Hardhome is simple send ships save the day. But he does not have the ships, so asks the Bank of Braavos for help, 3 of Stannis' ships also return and Jon takes them though they are not fit for sea and need a refit. He has other ships seized as wel land then has to wait for good weather. All of these are delays. Jon had Val and Wildlings, Val unlike the Rangers proved capable of going north of the wall and returning. Why not send the Wildlings by land from Eastwatch, it would be slow but they don't need near the amount of time the ships need to prepare for the mission not to mention his master of ships seems think this is a bad plan and this is a man who helped Jon get elected. Also a base force of Wildlings would be able to communicate better with the other Wildlings than the Watch. You also gain the ability to send the Giants by land and while not fast they can sure as hell give an enemy pause. Hardhome turns out to be what it appears to be a trap. After all the Others seem very intent on luring out the Rangers who seem a primary target for them and also seem to be observing them. Jon would not know about Royce but he would know about Benjen and his men, the fist and Crasters.

The watch has a primary goal defend the realm from the Others. Now for some reason the early watch proved capable of doing this with one castle and one secret door. Jon has yet to realize that. The mission to hard home ends in failure, and Mel informs him they are all dead, but Jon claims she is always wrong although she was right about a girl in grey, dark wings dark words and the rangings. Jon plans a second mission to Hardhome this time by land. Why? To play the hero? Once again next to no intel other than the Wights are there and everyone is dying. It's not that hard to imagine Mel is correct though it is for Jon. But Jon gets a nasty letter and gets angry. So instead of good judgment he decides he must march south to war with Ramsey and still send a force to Hardhome, thus stripping the wall he is sworn to defend of most of it's defenders. Ramsey was not real threat to the watch, a simple look out the window informs you why. It has been snowing for weeks, there are no roads, and it is snowing again. Common sense tells you it would take Ramsey an extremely long time to march some 700 miles north with no road, extreme weather conditions, and very heavy amounts of snow fall and snow on the ground. Jon even expressed these ideas when thinking about the relief mission to Hardhome. As a reader we are also privy to see what the weather did to Stannis and his men. They were slowed, supplied dwindled men were dying and starving and that was from Deepwood to the outpost. His force could barely move. Jon would subject his force to these same conditions, give up shelter and warmth, give himself a long logistics tail and march an inferior force 700 miles south to a enemy with a superior force in one of the most highly defendable fortresses in the world. Pretty much giving his enemy every advantage in the world. Now Ramsey on the other hand would be subject to the same dangers we saw with Stannis and would be marching on an enemy that has time to prepare, recon south, and pick the field of battle all from a sheltered and well supplied position. But no he was angry so suicide mission south and take away all the people you just got to help you defend the wall from the real enemy. He also wants to devide his forces and send more people to Hardhom, taking away yet more defenders, and sending them on yet another suicide mission against better advice. Some people think this march north and south would have succeeded but as of to date no force sent North of the wall has succeeded something else Jon has not noticed or considered.

Bowen may have been wrong in what he did but he also may have saved many lives from Jon's emotion based choices. Jon should of been spending his time sending out Wildlings to bring in as many Wildlings as possible. There are very few members of the watch, and the Wildlings know the north better than they do. If the Others are at Hardhome then send your Wildlings out from Shadow tower to recruit as many as they can. You have to decide who you can and can't save. We know where the Wildlings are gathering near Shadow Tower, send out the Thenns and Tormund and some of his best men, save who can. Don't toss away people on two obvious traps that have no chance of success. You don't have the ability to observe your enemy or intel north, so you need speed, nothing past 30 miles men and spear wives on horses, first sign of danger you run and you run fast.

Jon has done no break down with his people on the ability and Dangers of the Others and the Wights. You have any enemy with no known CoG, no logistics tail, the elemets work to their strengths and against you, they don't fatigue, they are observing the watch, they are baiting them into traps, they did it with Royce, they did it with Mormont, they did it at the fist and they are doing it at Hardhome. Because they have no logistic tail and do not fatigue and the weather works for them they can beat you with maneuver warfare, and clearly attrition works for them. They have superior recon ability, they can not only use the Wight's which are expendable they can use Wighted animals and the ability to Wight animals was observed at the fist. Yet no consideration that they are capable of watching you using anything from a bird to a mouse. He never debriefs Tormund or the other Wildlings on the Wights, yet claims he is looking for intel. He sends Sam away but nobody including himself continues to look at the watches library most of which is unexplored for more intel. If you can't gain intel from scouting and observation than your only options are anything you can get from the Wildlings and history. Here is a guy that has done very little reading on his enemy and has spoken little about the Others with the Wildlings, Tormund and mance give him some small insight but he does not seek any support or further intel.

Jon claims he is really worried about the Others but the first excuse he got to leave after Hardhome he used. He is not prepared for unexpected developments under the fog of war and acts impulsivly and emotionally to said developments. Is Stannis really dead? You are sitting at your base of operations with a small army of raiders, send some south to investigate the truth. They will be moving much faster than any major force Ramsey planned on using to march north. Where is the naturally occuring OODA loop? Observe, Orient, Decide, Act. Jon has problems with the first, skips the second, bases the third off emotion and then decides. A simple operations process from Jon who happens to be strategic command. He is a very likable person at times, but he really does know nothing and is doing little to educate himself rather he tries to enforce that everyone be more like him. Cause he knows, he is 16 and has it all figured out. He gave next to no consideration to the men he sent to their deaths on the first Hardhome mission. Emotionally disconnected from his people, ignorant to command, advice, strategy and tactics, easy to anger and makes to many choices based on personal emotion and desire. Both Jon and Dany stuggle with their early commands and or ruling, both struggle with being both disconnected from those around them, various forms of depression, are affraid to trust many around them, are stubborn, both seem rather intelligent, both are charasmatic, Dany appears to be far better at tactics and strategy and Jon appears to be better at negotiation.

I can pick most young leaders apart, but I think that is one of the reasons they both become more believable and better reads for me. Neither is a Mary Sue, young leaders should struggle with leadership and go through emotional extremes of highs an lows, they should make bad choices they have no experience, they are both subject to fuck ups and fucking up. Leadership and war and resposibility is hard god damn work and for a couple of teenagers I think they are coming along, though both need to play to their strengths more and aknowledge their weaknesses and mistakes. Which of course young leaders often do. Both made a classic mistake while struggling with comprimise in Dance, Dany comprimises to much with the slavers, and Jon does the same with the Wildlings. The Wall comes first, it's what stands between the World and the Others. Not Ramsey, not Stannis who went south, not Hardhome, not Benjen. You save who can when you can, and you make the hard call with intelligence, logic and ration not emotion, that includes both of them. Emotion will get you sometimes and effect anyone but you got to fight when it comes to certain command choices.

You can refer to this thread to see why your so-called Jon criticism utterly fails.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

This thread is full of Dany whitewashing which proves the irrational Dany worship. Maybe it is time for you to do more rereads to come up with new ways to whitewash Dany because they are getting old pretty fast.

Why is whitewashing? Because we like Dany and we understand the context and reasonement behind her actions?

Let me ask you something. If we say that the reason the Ironborn have to pillage and being reavers is because they don't have good lands and were given an unfair deal by Aegon, is an explanation, an excuse or whitewashing?

Whitewashing is not explain. Is justification. Explain and justify are not the same. Explain is say "well, this person killed other person because he thought his/her life in danger". I'm not passing a good or a bad judgement, I'm just explaining the motivation. Whitewishing is justifying by minimizing the crime or by denying it. It is saying "X just shot and it's bad luck the thief was there. Besides, it was a thief, so, who cares??". Whitewashing strips a person from guilt and responsibility or it presents double standars, like, for example, when some readers say Jon was mad at Thorne for mocking Ned so, it was understandable that he tried to kill him, but Dany is wrong on letting her emotions control her. So, why is ok. for Jon to let his emotions control him and not for Dany?

Dany's actions in the rereads are often presented in a way we can explain the background and context of her decisions. You will see that many rational people who defend her actions against the slavers don't say "well, they were slavers, so who the fuck cares!" but "yes, those slavers provoked her". Also, in this situation, the slavers are plot devices for Dany to be judged by readers and make her wonder about her own sanity and whether she's able to rule or not. Is she some evil tyrant or a girl with a different and black-and-white sense of justice? Remember the poll I made about her? From 141 responses, these are the results.

The crucifixion of the slavers was:

Justice (29) 21%

They deserved punishment, but not that one. (58) 41%

Wrong, but needed (28) 20%

She had no right. (11) 8%

They had it coming. I cheered. (13) 9%

Mostly answers say she wasn't right or that she overreacted. Only 13 people just answered "they had it coming" and celebrated it. Only 11 thought she had no right. The rest of people mostly agree a punishment was needed, and 58, the majority, thought she was excessive with that one punishment but nevertheless, needed. See, no one is striping Dany from the responsibilities of her actions, except a minority. The rest doesn't cheer what she did. They agree that it was a grey situation. There is no whitewashing of Dany. When the actions of one character we don't like are explained, we shouldn't call it whitewashing. It's like when people call "filler" those chapters they don't like. That's not what those definitions mean.

[OldGimletEye]

My opinion as well. But I wonder if it's even necessary. What can one do with the knowledge that one's father was not a nice guy. She will know, but it won't necessarily make her "a better ruler"...I'm still to understand the importance of the knowledge of her father's ignorance. And maybe I'm being ignorant myself in asking this question but I honestly don't see how it will be helpful in the grand scheme of things.

*********** PRICK ALERT (Basic Ridicule of An Argument Here) ******************

Yes, because "Ignorance Is Strength". Is this the latest slogan from the KNP?

************END PRICK ALERT ************************************************************

Now why would a political leader want to know about one of the most important political events in recent Westeros' history? Could it be that such knowledge would keep said leader from doing a mark time march upon their own crank, when engaging in diplomacy? Could it be that said knowledge might prevent said leader from making the same mistakes as their own father. Could it be that said knowledge might give said leader some perspective on the rebellion? Could it be that said knowledge might help said leader to recognize a severe institutional weakness in the Westeros' Monarchy.

******************** PRICK ALERT (A Bit More Ridicule Here)*******************************************

Heaven forbid incurious Dany actually learn anything about the territory she means to rule.

**********************END PRICK ALERT**********************************************************************

[LmL]

From the posts you quoted and bolded, it is clear that according to you, irrational Dany hatred is any criticism of Dany you dont agree with. Again this proves the sheer amount of irrational Dany worship in this thread.

Couldn't agree more. The Dany defenders are totally incoherent, completely biased, and extremely emotional and reactionary. They've essentially ruined this thread completely.

No, everyone doesn't agree with you. No, the OP didn't set up logical fallacies - it asked a simple question, what are her possible motivations for INVADING, which is exactly what she has been planning to do the entire time? The OP then examines all the reasons we have been given, and shoots them down. You can disagree about whether the reasons are valid or not, or that there may be other reasons, but there is nothing close to a logical fallacy present. To claim there is just shows that some people can't think rationally about Dany. I have mixed feelings on her myself, I don't love her or hate her... But some of you guys are just incoherent and your arguments are laughably inconsistent.

I shall now avoid these types in the future, as well as the "Ice and Fire Cynics," who think all the prophecy is just Bs and doesn't mean anything, and that all the old legends are meaningless as well, as they tend to engage in trolling behavior, like sabotaging threads they don't like. Why do people even comment on threads they totally hate? I don't get that. Just find one you like.