Between Sansa and Daenerys, who would make the better ruling Queen?

[khal drogon]

7 hours ago, superninja76 said:

Anyways,I would much rather have margarey over these two.

 

Yeah unknown angel is better than known devil.

[Kaibaman]

8 hours ago, teej6 said:

Fan ficy arguments? What does that mean? I don't claim to have any greater understanding of her arc than other readers (though perhaps you ), but when the writer has her thinking in her latest thoughts about fire and blood and dragons plant no trees, any rationale reader understands that to mean as Dany turning away from peace and society building to conquest and destroying her enemies. It doesn't take a very astute reader to decipher this.  Dany's tendency to be merciless to her enemies in the past and her latest epiphany only reinforces the perception in readers minds that Dany will most likely end up wiping out her enemies by any means possible. 

And btw, becoming ruthless and merciless does not mean becoming one dimensional. Tywin was ruthless and merciless. I suppose he was one-dimensional to you.

Its not like she's completely giving up on peace, its just that right now despite her best efforts peace is impossible. So really the way to resolve the conflict at her door is to take a more merciless approach. Do you seriously expect Sansa to act all cordial to the Lannisters, Freys and Boltons or do you expect her to destroy them mercilessly?

[El Guapo]

Daenerys absolutely came to the right conclusion at the end of ADWD. Fire and blood is what was needed in Meereen and probably Westeros too. I can't wait.

[khal drogon]

15 minutes ago, Kaibaman said:

Its not like she's completely giving up on peace, its just that right now despite her best efforts peace is impossible. So really the way to resolve the conflict at her door is to take a more merciless approach. Do you seriously expect Sansa to act all cordial to the Lannisters, Freys and Boltons or do you expect her to destroy them mercilessly?

I expect being ruthless towards enemies from any King and Queen. It is what kings and queens do everytime to keep power. Afterwards it is about peace and their people. But people weirdly come up with the idea that Dany now jumped to an extreme and she is now interested only in destruction after her epiphany. I think they don't think beyond what Fire and Blood literally means.

[teej6]

2 hours ago, khal drogon said:

Turning down to War and conquest is not equal to mindless destruction your previous argument. Her embracing her house words has more  meaning which I had explained in my previous post and I don't doubt you would not understand it. And how wrong you are if you think she has left peace and society building forever for war and conquest. So after Westeros which place she will destroy and conquer? You know you used that as a support argument for why she would be bad ruler because she likes destruction over peace and that you arrived from a single line. Yeah sure no conjectures. You need more support if you go far as to claim she will wipe out her enemies by "any means possible".

Mindless doom and destruction is one dimensional in my book. It would mean less internal conflicts, less moral dilemmas which is uncharacteristic of any multidimensional character. Being ruthless to enemies is fine. I do expect her to be ruthless but not as ruthless as Tywin. I don't expect her to plan a wedding and slit the throats of their guests. I don't expect her to flood a mine full of people. I certainly don't expect her to order her army to rape and pillage to terrorise people. Anyway I am at least glad that you changed your stand from mindless doom and destruction(like Mountain) to ruthlessness like Tywin.

Anyway I do expect her to use Fire and Blood but with qualities that defines her to be intact. Her intent to rule a peaceful Westeros would remain. Her intent to end slavery would remain. Her stand against rape isn't going to change. Instead she would use dragons to enforce the things she failed at and which she was too afraid to before. She finally learnt to use dragons as a conquering tool not a mindless destructive tool. Like Aegon and his sisters she would use dragonfire and diplomacy possibly with Tyrion at her side. That's the path I see for her. 

FYI, I didn't change my stand on Dany bringing doom and destruction to her enemies and all that oppose her. I stand by it. IMO Dany will create chaos and destruction with her dragons in Westeros.

In one of your earlier posts in this thread you stated "Aegon the Conqueror and his sisters used fire and blood to conquer Westeros. And do anyone say they were only interested in doom and destruction?" Well, tell that to all those people who got burned to a crisp in the Field of Fire. It's amazing that the burning of 4000 plus men by dragon fire doesn't seem like wanton destruction to you. What do you think Dany with her dragons will do to her enemies? Another one of your earlier statements on this thread is "A dragon is not a mindless destructive beast." And pray tell what is a dragon, a sentient benevolent beast? It kills when it's rider commands it to as we've seen time and again in ASOIF and the world book. 

And the mountain does not have a monopoly on wanton destruction in the books. All those that start wars for self serving purposes or because they think they have a right to rule are guilty of causing destruction and death. 

As for the bolded part above, what does that even mean? Are you trying to say that the end justifies the means. I guess you are. Perhaps when Dany's goal was ending slavery, you could make this argument. Even then, randomly killing and sacking cities was not justifiable. But once she comes to Westeros, she's not coming to free slaves but to claim what she believes is rightfully hers through fire and blood. And her killing of people supporting another claimant to the IT may perhaps be seen by people like you as badass and justifiable but it's still murder and wanton destruction in my eyes. Dany is not alone in her quest for power and all those who vie for power in Westeros are guilty of causing war and destruction but none of the others have 3 fire breathing dragons.   

And FYI, Dany has not learned to use her dragons in the books. In the books, Viserion and Rhaegal are on their own and, Drogon doesn't seem to be doing what she wants or going where she wants. So how has she "finally learnt to use dragons as a conquering tool"? I guess you are confusing the fanfic that D&D has created in the show with the books. And also, Tyrion hasn't met Dany in the books and there's no guarantee he will. Again, confusing show stuff with what's in the books. Or is it just wishful thinking on your part. 

[teej6]

1 hour ago, El Guapo said:

Daenerys absolutely came to the right conclusion at the end of ADWD. Fire and blood is what was needed in Meereen and probably Westeros too. I can't wait.

Well at least you're honest enough to call a spade a spade. 

[teej6]

2 hours ago, Kaibaman said:

Its not like she's completely giving up on peace, its just that right now despite her best efforts peace is impossible. So really the way to resolve the conflict at her door is to take a more merciless approach. Do you seriously expect Sansa to act all cordial to the Lannisters, Freys and Boltons or do you expect her to destroy them mercilessly?

I beg to differ, I think Dany has given up on peace, at least in the short-term. This is not to say that Dany is the only one guilty of causing war and destruction for self-serving purposes. All of the current players vying for the IT is guilty of the same but what makes Dany unique is that she has the ability to inflict the most damage (not including Cersei who'll probably burn KL down).

No, I don't expect Sansa to be cordial and kind to the Lannisters, Freys, or Boltons, but at the same time I don't expect her to be capable of mass killing as she doesn't have 3 fire breathing dragons, or an army to command as yet. In my answer to the OP, I did say Dany would be better than Sansa at ruling, although I'd prefer neither. 

[Nictarion]

1 hour ago, teej6 said:

FYI, I didn't change my stand on Dany bringing doom and destruction to her enemies and all that oppose her. I stand by it. IMO Dany will create chaos and destruction with her dragons in Westeros.

In one of your earlier posts in this thread you stated "Aegon the Conqueror and his sisters used fire and blood to conquer Westeros. And do anyone say they were only interested in doom and destruction?" Well, tell that to all those people who got burned to a crisp in the Field of Fire. It's amazing that the burning of 4000 plus men by dragon fire doesn't seem like wanton destruction to you. What do you think Dany with her dragons will do to her enemies? Another one of your earlier statements on this thread is "A dragon is not a mindless destructive beast." And pray tell what is a dragon, a sentient benevolent beast? It kills when it's rider commands it to as we've seen time and again in ASOIF and the world book. 

And the mountain does not have a monopoly on wanton destruction in the books. All those that start wars for self serving purposes or because they think they have a right to rule are guilty of causing destruction and death. 

As for the bolded part above, what does that even mean? Are you trying to say that the end justifies the means. I guess you are. Perhaps when Dany's goal was ending slavery, you could make this argument. Even then, randomly killing and sacking cities was not justifiable. But once she comes to Westeros, she's not coming to free slaves but to claim what she believes is rightfully hers through fire and blood. And her killing of people supporting another claimant to the IT may perhaps be seen by people like you as badass and justifiable but it's still murder and wanton destruction in my eyes. Dany is not alone in her quest for power and all those who vie for power in Westeros are guilty of causing war and destruction but none of the others have 3 fire breathing dragons.   

And FYI, Dany has not learned to use her dragons in the books. In the books, Viserion and Rhaegal are on their own and, Drogon doesn't seem to be doing what she wants or going where she wants. So how has she "finally learnt to use dragons as a conquering tool"? I guess you are confusing the fanfic that D&D has created in the show with the books. And also, Tyrion hasn't met Dany in the books and there's no guarantee he will. Again, confusing show stuff with what's in the books. Or is it just wishful thinking on your part. 

You honestly think there's a chance Dany and Tyrion aren't going to meet?

[khal drogon]

2 hours ago, teej6 said:

FYI, I didn't change my stand on Dany bringing doom ahend destruction to her enemies and all that oppose her. I stand by it. IMO Dany will create chaos and destruction with her dragons in Westeros.

In one of your earlier posts in this thread you stated "Aegon the Conqueror and his sisters used fire and blood to conquer Westeros. And do anyone say they were only interested in doom and destruction?" Well, tell that to all those people who got burned to a crisp in the Field of Fire. It's amazing that the burning of 4000 plus men by dragon fire doesn't seem like wanton destruction to you. What do you think Dany with her dragons will do to her enemies? Another one of your earlier statements on this thread is "A dragon is not a mindless destructive beast." And pray tell what is a dragon, a sentient benevolent beast? It kills when it's rider commands it to as we've seen time and again in ASOIF and the world book. 

And the mountain does not have a monopoly on wanton destruction in the books. All those that start wars for self serving purposes or because they think they have a right to rule are guilty of causing destruction and death. 

As for the bolded part above, what does that even mean? Are you trying to say that the end justifies the means. I guess you are. Perhaps when Dany's goal was ending slavery, you could make this argument. Even then, randomly killing and sacking cities was not justifiable. But once she comes to Westeros, she's not coming to free slaves but to claim what she believes is rightfully hers through fire and blood. And her killing of people supporting another claimant to the IT may perhaps be seen by people like you as badass and justifiable but it's still murder and wanton destruction in my eyes. Dany is not alone in her quest for power and all those who vie for power in Westeros are guilty of causing war and destruction but none of the others have 3 fire breathing dragons.   

And FYI, Dany has not learned to use her dragons in the books. In the books, Viserion and Rhaegal are on their own and, Drogon doesn't seem to be doing what she wants or going where she wants. So how has she "finally learnt to use dragons as a conquering tool"? I guess you are confusing the fanfic that D&D has created in the show with the books. And also, Tyrion hasn't met Dany in the books and there's no guarantee he will. Again, confusing show stuff with what's in the books. Or is it just wishful thinking on your part. 

Now you seem to ignore stuff that are clearly bound to happen as unlikely because that doesn't fit your argument. Well. Ignore the show and believe your headcanon as much you want but the broad strokes of her arc is there in the show. See you after reading TWOW.

Yeah war is bad and anyone making war is bad. blah blah. Probably this series is not for you as half of the people in the series make war and kill people. Maybe you are one of those rare guys who didn't cheer when Robb rode south to destroy the Lannisters. At least you now compare her to other claimants now from your stand of her being devil incarnate. 

Still waiting for the explanation how did you arrive at "she will kill by any means possible". Because I don't see any reason other than you hate her. Better call a spade a spade and accept you came up with those arguments because you hate her.

[SeanF]

3 hours ago, teej6 said:

FYI, I didn't change my stand on Dany bringing doom and destruction to her enemies and all that oppose her. I stand by it. IMO Dany will create chaos and destruction with her dragons in Westeros.

In one of your earlier posts in this thread you stated "Aegon the Conqueror and his sisters used fire and blood to conquer Westeros. And do anyone say they were only interested in doom and destruction?" Well, tell that to all those people who got burned to a crisp in the Field of Fire. It's amazing that the burning of 4000 plus men by dragon fire doesn't seem like wanton destruction to you. What do you think Dany with her dragons will do to her enemies? Another one of your earlier statements on this thread is "A dragon is not a mindless destructive beast." And pray tell what is a dragon, a sentient benevolent beast? It kills when it's rider commands it to as we've seen time and again in ASOIF and the world book. 

And the mountain does not have a monopoly on wanton destruction in the books. All those that start wars for self serving purposes or because they think they have a right to rule are guilty of causing destruction and death. 

As for the bolded part above, what does that even mean? Are you trying to say that the end justifies the means. I guess you are. Perhaps when Dany's goal was ending slavery, you could make this argument. Even then, randomly killing and sacking cities was not justifiable. But once she comes to Westeros, she's not coming to free slaves but to claim what she believes is rightfully hers through fire and blood. And her killing of people supporting another claimant to the IT may perhaps be seen by people like you as badass and justifiable but it's still murder and wanton destruction in my eyes. Dany is not alone in her quest for power and all those who vie for power in Westeros are guilty of causing war and destruction but none of the others have 3 fire breathing dragons.   

And FYI, Dany has not learned to use her dragons in the books. In the books, Viserion and Rhaegal are on their own and, Drogon doesn't seem to be doing what she wants or going where she wants. So how has she "finally learnt to use dragons as a conquering tool"? I guess you are confusing the fanfic that D&D has created in the show with the books. And also, Tyrion hasn't met Dany in the books and there's no guarantee he will. Again, confusing show stuff with what's in the books. Or is it just wishful thinking on your part. 

Dany and Drogon have become closely bonded, by the end of ADWD.  I'm not sure who will ride Viserion and Rhaegal.

As Parwan liked to say, Dany fits in.  She has a greater degree of compassion for the downtrodden than most people of her background, but she is ambitious, ruthless, even cruel at times.  So, yes, I do see her sacking cities that offer resistance, and executing the ringleaders of those who oppose her.  That doesn't mean carrying out genocide, or ordering mass rape as a terror tactic, or keeping captives as slave labour.  In terms of the way she wages war, she's more on a par with Stannis , rather than Tywin Lannister.

[1000th Lord Commander]

I'm leaning towards Sansa. She may have started out the books as a flighty, irresponsible girl, but she is learning rapidly that her actions have consequences, and that she has power of a sort. When she is done with Littlefinger, she will be a power to be reckoned with in her own right. Pick a few good advisors to go around her, and she would be a good queen.

Dany will find it easier to assume the throne, but the question is who would make the better ruling queen, so I'm discounting that. Dany's major problem is that she knows nothing about Westeros. She's got a few stories about her family, but knows nothing about the people, the traditions. While she's on a similar learning curve to Sansa, at the moment, I'm inclined against her.

[teej6]

5 hours ago, Nictarion said:

You honestly think there's a chance Dany and Tyrion aren't going to meet?

They haven't as yet but granted they most likely will. But I doubt their meeting is going to be anything like the rubbish on the show.

[teej6]

5 hours ago, khal drogon said:

Now you seem to ignore stuff that are clearly bound to happen as unlikely because that doesn't fit your argument. Well. Ignore the show and believe your headcanon as much you want but the broad strokes of her arc is there in the show. See you after reading TWOW.

Yeah war is bad and anyone making war is bad. blah blah. Probably this series is not for you as half of the people in the series make war and kill people. Maybe you are one of those rare guys who didn't cheer when Robb rode south to destroy the Lannisters. At least you now compare her to other claimants now from your stand of her being devil incarnate. 

Still waiting for the explanation how did you arrive at "she will kill by any means possible". Because I don't see any reason other than you hate her. Better call a spade a spade and accept you came up with those arguments because you hate her.

Clearly bound to happen? Did you get a copy of TWOW already? I do not take the rubbish on the show as canon as you do. 

War is bad and those waging it for self-interests are not doing right by the people of Westeros and if you can't understand that from reading the books, I don't know what else to say. You do know that GRRM was a conscientious objector to the war in Vietnam. And please stop putting words in my mouth. I didn't say Dany was evil or neither do I hate her character. Again, I repeat for it seems to get lost on you, everyone (yes including Robb) who waged war for selfish reasons do not seem to fully comprehend or care about the destruction and hardship it causes. And this is nothing new, GRRM seems to show this aspect of war and destruction time and again. In Dany's case, the scale of the destruction will be much larger. 

[teej6]

4 hours ago, SeanF said:

Dany and Drogon have become closely bonded, by the end of ADWD.  I'm not sure who will ride Viserion and Rhaegal.

As Parwan liked to say, Dany fits in.  She has a greater degree of compassion for the downtrodden than most people of her background, but she is ambitious, ruthless, even cruel at times.  So, yes, I do see her sacking cities that offer resistance, and executing the ringleaders of those who oppose her.  That doesn't mean carrying out genocide, or ordering mass rape as a terror tactic, or keeping captives as slave labour.  In terms of the way she wages war, she's more on a par with Stannis , rather than Tywin Lannister.

Dany may have bonded with Drogon but she has trouble controlling Drogon. As yet, he doesn't seem to want to go where she wants him to. 

Dany does show compassion to who she defines as her people. However, to her enemies she has been merciless and even downright cruel. The point I'm making is that when she comes to Westeros, the people that oppose her will be people we as readers are invested in and her bringing down her fire and blood on Westeros will not be the same as her sacking of Mereen. This time the reader will care. I know I will. Also, I don't see how Dany is going to stop the Dothraki from pillaging and raping once she sets them loose on Westeros.  I feel, Dany after her realization in ADWD will become more like Tywin. 

[khal drogon]

2 hours ago, teej6 said:

Clearly bound to happen? Did you get a copy of TWOW already? I do not take the rubbish on the show as canon as you do. 

War is bad and those waging it for self-interests are not doing right by the people of Westeros and if you can't understand that from reading the books, I don't know what else to say. You do know that GRRM was a conscientious objector to the war in Vietnam. And please stop putting words in my mouth. I didn't say Dany was evil or neither do I hate her character. Again, I repeat for it seems to get lost on you, everyone (yes including Robb) who waged war for selfish reasons do not seem to fully comprehend or care about the destruction and hardship it causes. And this is nothing new, GRRM seems to show this aspect of war and destruction time and again. In Dany's case, the scale of the destruction will be much larger. 

Really don't need the next book to see Dany controlling Drogon. On the other hand claiming "she will mercilessly kill with any means possible" definitely needs next books. Maybe you've got a copy.

Learn more about GRRM's stand on war. He shows the brutal realities of war but he is not a pacifist by his own words. Again he made 3/4th of his characters as nobles who would wage war for selfish reasons or reasons that may always cause deaths. In Dany's case she along with making war also cares about the lowest denominator which a lot don't(including Sansa) and she also got the biggest weapon to save humanity. If you see her only in the former way I don't see why you don't see every others the same way. I could see Sansa waging a war to retake Winterfell and as you say no war is without destruction. In that case both fit into the same category. Probably you would use the same yardstick to measure others. 

Anyway your initial point seems to be anyone who makes war is not fit for rulership. On the other hand that is very typical of monarchs. Monarchs wage war for selfish reasons all the time. That's why monarchy failed a system. Again the book is about them and complaining that people make war is silly.

And you saying she will be like Tywin. I call BS.

 

   

[teej6]

8 hours ago, khal drogon said:

Really don't need the next book to see Dany controlling Drogon. On the other hand claiming "she will mercilessly kill with any means possible" definitely needs next books. Maybe you've got a copy.

Learn more about GRRM's stand on war. He shows the brutal realities of war but he is not a pacifist by his own words. Again he made 3/4th of his characters as nobles who would wage war for selfish reasons or reasons that may always cause deaths. In Dany's case she along with making war also cares about the lowest denominator which a lot don't(including Sansa) and she also got the biggest weapon to save humanity. If you see her only in the former way I don't see why you don't see every others the same way. I could see Sansa waging a war to retake Winterfell and as you say no war is without destruction. In that case both fit into the same category. Probably you would use the same yardstick to measure others. 

Anyway your initial point seems to be anyone who makes war is not fit for rulership. On the other hand that is very typical of monarchs. Monarchs wage war for selfish reasons all the time. That's why monarchy failed a system. Again the book is about them and complaining that people make war is silly.

And you saying she will be like Tywin. I call BS.

 

   

Please show me where I stated Dany "will mercilessly kill with any means possible". If you are quoting me, please DO NOT distort my words. My exact words were "Dany will most likely end up wiping out her enemies by any means possible" and that she will be merciless to her enemies. Please show some integrity when you debate on these threads. 

If I recall you said Dany would control all 3 of her dragons not just Drogon, which you based on the nonsense on the show. If you've read the books, you'd know that a dragon cannot have more than one rider at a time. So your assumption about Dany controlling all 3 dragons most likely will not come to pass. 

I don't need to "learn" about GRRM's take on war, but judging by what he has said about war and his past actions, I think GRRM is a pacifist of sorts although he qualifies his opposition to wars by stating that he does understand the need for just wars and isn't against all wars, especially if the cause is just. Dany's desire to conquer Westeros, however, does not fit under the classification of a just war neither is she defending herself or her people. Instead she is about to invade Westeros and go to war for purely selfish motives such as her desire for vengeance and some distorted sense of entitlement/claim in thinking Westeros is rightfully hers. I see nothing just in her quest to win Westeros, it's only a conqueror's desire to conquer more. 

I don't understand what you are rambling on about Sansa. In my initial response to the OP, I clearly stated that given a choice between Dany and Sansa (which is a choice between bad and worse), I'd have to go with Dany as a ruler. And as to the bolded part, I'm not sure whether it is your lack of comprehension skills or if you are deliberately and willfully ignoring what I write but I've repeatedly said in my posts that all in Westeros (including Robb) who waged war to achieve their selfish interests are guilty of causing wanton death and destruction.  

And I think I'm done debating you on this thread as you seem to twist and distort people's statements to suit your needs. 

[khal drogon]

7 hours ago, teej6 said:

Please show me where I stated Dany "will mercilessly kill with any means possible". If you are quoting me, please DO NOT distort my words. My exact words were "Dany will most likely end up wiping out her enemies by any means possible" and that she will be merciless to her enemies. Please show some integrity when you debate on these threads. 

If I recall you said Dany would control all 3 of her dragons not just Drogon, which you based on the nonsense on the show. If you've read the books, you'd know that a dragon cannot have more than one rider at a time. So your assumption about Dany controlling all 3 dragons most likely will not come to pass. 

I don't need to "learn" about GRRM's take on war, but judging by what he has said about war and his past actions, I think GRRM is a pacifist of sorts although he qualifies his opposition to wars by stating that he does understand the need for just wars and isn't against all wars, especially if the cause is just. Dany's desire to conquer Westeros, however, does not fit under the classification of a just war neither is she defending herself or her people. Instead she is about to invade Westeros and go to war for purely selfish motives such as her desire for vengeance and some distorted sense of entitlement/claim in thinking Westeros is rightfully hers. I see nothing just in her quest to win Westeros, it's only a conqueror's desire to conquer more. 

I don't understand what you are rambling on about Sansa. In my initial response to the OP, I clearly stated that given a choice between Dany and Sansa (which is a choice between bad and worse), I'd have to go with Dany as a ruler. And as to the bolded part, I'm not sure whether it is your lack of comprehension skills or if you are deliberately and willfully ignoring what I write but I've repeatedly said in my posts that all in Westeros (including Robb) who waged war to achieve their selfish interests are guilty of causing wanton death and destruction.  

And I think I'm done debating you on this thread as you seem to twist and distort people's statements to suit your needs. 

Talking about integrity while you say I said "Dany could control all three dragons" which I never ever said. It's ridiculous. Care to provide the quote where I said it. 

Again I don't find the difference between your quote and how I interpreted it and the fact stands that you need the books to even go far as to claim that.

Yeah really it's me distorting facts and not you? Great irony. I could give you example doing that like the one I mentioned in this same post. Also it's you shifting goalposts too often and call things that don't fit your opinions ramblings without even trying to understand the points others are trying to make. It's you who refuse to acknowledge anything that is not in your headcanon. It's not exactly a pleasure for me to argue with you too and I see no point arguing further. Thanks.

[Drogonthedread]

18 hours ago, teej6 said:

Dany may have bonded with Drogon but she has trouble controlling Drogon. As yet, he doesn't seem to want to go where she want him to. 

Dany does show compassion to who she defines as her people. However, to her enemies she has been merciless and even downrightcruel. The point I'm making is that when she comes to Westeros, the people that oppose her will be people we as readers are invested in and her bringing down her fire and blood on Westeros will not be the same as her sacking of Mereen. This time the reader will care. I know I will. Also, I don't see how Dany is going to stop the Dothraki from pillaging and raping once she sets them loose on Westeros.  I feel, Dany after her realization in ADWD will become more like Tywin. 

And yet you keep saying she has three dragons 

Maybe it's you who keep mixing things with the show ..

And fwiw books ended drogon doing exactly what damy wanted ..

 

I do hope that this statement that dany believes something that's Rightfully goes away..she's not only alone in thinking that way...everyone from Robert to Ned acknowledges her right and even the common people drink to her name as rightful queen of westeros.

[SeanF]

11 hours ago, teej6 said:

 

I don't need to "learn" about GRRM's take on war, but judging by what he has said about war and his past actions, I think GRRM is a pacifist of sorts although he qualifies his opposition to wars by stating that he does understand the need for just wars and isn't against all wars, especially if the cause is just. Dany's desire to conquer Westeros, however, does not fit under the classification of a just war neither is she defending herself or her people. Instead she is about to invade Westeros and go to war for purely selfish motives such as her desire for vengeance and some distorted sense of entitlement/claim in thinking Westeros is rightfully hers. I see nothing just in her quest to win Westeros, it's only a conqueror's desire to conquer more. 

 

This is where a modern reader will differ from the characters in the books.  Dany would take the view that her invasion of Westeros is a just war, fought to regain the Throne from which her family had been treacherously driven, and to avenge the deaths of her father, brother, and relatives.

[khal drogon]

4 hours ago, SeanF said:

This is where a modern reader will differ frm the characters in the books.  Dany would take the view that her invasion of Westeros is a just war, fought to regain the Throne from which her family had been treacherously driven, and to avenge the deaths of her father, brother, and relatives.

Not to forget even some people of Westeros will see it as a just war. It is evident from people drinking for Daenerys or the smallfolk who support the war of one claimant or the other. In fact that part would come into play while Aegon VI retakes the throne. Aegon VI have the exact same reason to invade as her and the foreshadowing tells he would have a lot of support. Means his cause would be seen as just by people.