The execution of Janos Slynt was spot on vol 2

[Minsc]

7 hours ago, Starkz said:

He has defended her quite vigorously and looked down upon every decision Jon has made harshly. Comparing the two, which are totally different situations, what Jon does it definitely more palatable and he hasn’t done anything close to as bad as Dany torturing people or crucifying people, some of whom were innocent such as Hizadhar father. Every character isn’t perfect but saying they are terrible or bad leaders/people because of making the wrong decision is ludicrous.

To be fair only the show has Hizadhar mention that his father was innocent. 

[Lord Varys]

4 minutes ago, Minsc said:

To be fair only the show has Hizadhar mention that his father was innocent. 

Yeah, that's show nonsense. There is no reason to believe the slavers Dany crucified had nothing to do with the decision to crucify the slave children.

[Starkz]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Yeah, that's show nonsense. There is no reason to believe the slavers Dany crucified had nothing to do with the decision to crucify the slave children.

163 slaves were crucified, 163 masters were. So what you’re implying is that 163 masters each crucified one person and that it isn’t more palatable that it was a small group doing this instead of them each doing it individually whom probably were the most powerful of the masters and got off scot-free?

[Starkz]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

You don't have to a rocket scientist to realize that Mel only saw a girl on a dying horse in the flames, and that she never actually saw Arya Stark. I mean, how do you think Jon is going to feel when he realizes he tried to save a girl who wasn't his sister, causing events that led to his own assassination? Do you think he would have send Mance to fetch Jeyne Poole? Do you think he would have risked his life and honor to save her?

Most likely not. But nobody faults him for believing 'Arya' is Arya because we know he cannot know that she is not. Why do we say Mel should have known the girl was Alys Karstark and not Arya Stark?

I defended the crucifixion of the slavers insofar as this was 'war justice'. There are different rules in war than in peace time. I don't think this was the greatest idea anyone ever had nor do I consider it particularly just.

The same goes for the sack of Astapor. But I must say that I see in general no issue with slaves or people freeing slaves butchering the slavers - not in Martinworld, not in real life. If the slaves back in the US had collectively taken it upon themselves to put down the collective slaver elite (their families included) in some great revolt, I'd not have shed tears for those people.

There are things that do only change if you actually kill people. 

And my stand on Slynt never was that Jon had no right to kill the man, or that he was completely nuts to do it - I just think it was pretty extreme and could have been done differently. And Jon really has this issue with the fact that he is constantly forgiven/not punished for his transgressions - I in his position would hopefully remember how well I was treated and would thus also know how to administer clemency.

One certainly can make the case that Dany shouldn't have sacked Astapor the way she did. But since she apparently wanted to end slaver culture in that city it was not wrong to kill all the people raised in it. And it is not that we know how many boys in the age of 12-16 were actually slain during the sack of Astapor.

Keep in mind that Slynt and Jon were never at war. We don't talk about all the pages and young squires that may have died while Robb fell on Stafford's army - quite a few children might have died in that battle, too. And the same goes for many other battles.

Jon doesn't have the means to make such large blunders as Dany, but they are really driven by the same motives. It is Jon's compassion for the wildlings that drives a good deal of his actions in ADwD - just as Dany is driven by her compassion for the slaves and her desire for peace.

The problem with Jon is that he is technically not free to do what he likes while Dany is. Jon isn't some king with his own army, he is the Lord Commander of the Night's Watch.

But I'm not so much annoyed with Jon in the ADwD but the moronic actions of all the guys at the Wall. Nobody talks to anyone about the Others. Nobody tries to form a grand alliance that could hope to defeat them despite the fact that they know they will likely come.

And while Jon is right about the wildlings staying north of the Wall will likely make them wights, he doesn't really care about properly preparing the Watch to actually feed those people. Compassion, help, support, etc. are things you have to be able to afford. You can just promise stuff and then hope everything turns out well.

This is a world where winter can last years, and the Watch is nowhere prepared to take care of thousands of people.

Didn’t he make a deal with the Bank for food and supplies?

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, Starkz said:

163 slaves were crucified, 163 masters were. So what you’re implying is that 163 masters each crucified one person and that it isn’t more palatable that it was a small group doing this instead of them each doing it individually whom probably were the most powerful of the masters and got off scot-free?

We don't know a lot about the entire thing. Dany forced them to choose those who were executed, which could mean they choose those who were the most guilty, and most certainly who came up with the idea, one assumes.

I'd also say that one can see the entire class of the slavers were guilty of the crime - either by commanding/condoning it, or by not preventing. Standing around and not preventing a murder - and the whole thing was murder - can make you as guilty - or nearly as guilty - as the people who actually did the deed.

If we had more information on who commanded the crucifixion of the children and who condoned it we could assess the situation better.

1 hour ago, Starkz said:

Didn’t he make a deal with the Bank for food and supplies?

Yes. But he never told his officers that he did do that, and a potential loan (Tycho Nestoris didn't get back to Braavos yet) isn't a loan, and a loan isn't food.

The way Marsh describes the stores of the Watch they could run out of food in a year or even less time if they have to feed thousands of additional mouths.

[Starkz]

21 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

We don't know a lot about the entire thing. Dany forced them to choose those who were executed, which could mean they choose those who were the most guilty, and most certainly who came up with the idea, one assumes.

I'd also say that one can see the entire class of the slavers were guilty of the crime - either by commanding/condoning it, or by not preventing. Standing around and not preventing a murder - and the whole thing was murder - can make you as guilty - or nearly as guilty - as the people who actually did the deed.

If we had more information on who commanded the crucifixion of the children and who condoned it we could assess the situation better.

Yes. But he never told his officers that he did do that, and a potential loan (Tycho Nestoris didn't get back to Braavos yet) isn't a loan, and a loan isn't food.

The way Marsh describes the stores of the Watch they could run out of food in a year or even less time if they have to feed thousands of additional mouths.

Dissecting the whole situation when you break it down, it’s more than likely the slavers crucifying people were the most powerful and influential ones and when Dany tells all the slavers to choose, it’s the guilty powerful ones choosing the lessers ones as it would be in any society, having the weaker be the “fall guys” and not being made to pay for their heinous crimes. As for the loan you said Jon wasn’t concerning himself with plans to feed the watch. Crafting a deal with the bank, albeit a potential one until the next book, is what most people would call preparing for the future/winter. Anyway this isn’t what this post is about Janos is Jon subordinate, he disobeyed his orders and ridiculed him and as such he payed the price. Regardless of past experiences or their feelings for one another he was in the right to execute him after giving him multiple choices to comply beforehand.

[Rufus Snow]

34 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Yes. But he never told his officers that he did do that, and a potential loan (Tycho Nestoris didn't get back to Braavos yet) isn't a loan, and a loan isn't food.

I would expect there to be a written agreement in Jon's papers; the Iron Bank don't strike me as the sort to rely on the spoken word and a handshake.

Practically, it would also make more sense for it to be a line of credit rather than an upfront loan - why bother dragging gold across the narrow sea when it would just be so much easier to ship the bills across to the Bank for settlement? I know there's nothing in the text one way or the other, but as the iron Bank is now the largest in the known world, I bet they've got their shit together by now

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, Starkz said:

Dissecting the whole situation when you break it down, it’s more than likely the slavers crucifying people were the most powerful and influential ones and when Dany tells all the slavers to choose, it’s the guilty powerful ones choosing the lessers ones as it would be in any society, having the weaker be the “fall guys” and not being made to pay for their heinous crimes.

While this is not an impossible scenario, I imagine that if a bunch a few hundred of slavers were put in a cell to determine what 163 members of their circle are going to be killed they would likely pick (also) those who are actually responsible for the thing that put them all in this situation. That's just a part of group dynamics. Replace 'slavers' with 'Nazis' and 'those who are actually responsible' with Hitler, Göring, Goebbels, Himmler, etc. and you get the meaning. 

Now, we don't know how they chose them, but I find it not unlikely that some of the crucified slavers were indeed some of them who were responsible for the crucifixion of the children.

1 hour ago, Starkz said:

As for the loan you said Jon wasn’t concerning himself with plans to feed the watch. Crafting a deal with the bank, albeit a potential one until the next book, is what most people would call preparing for the future/winter.

There can grow something out of that deal - just as there can something grow out of Stannis' much larger loan and his intention to hire sellswords. But for that to work Tycho Nestoris has to return to Braavos alive. And, one might add, in Jon's case it would depend whether the deal survives Jon's death. Nestoris might decide to call it a day and not further involve himself with Marsh and whoever succeeds Jon.

1 hour ago, Starkz said:

Anyway this isn’t what this post is about Janos is Jon subordinate, he disobeyed his orders and ridiculed him and as such he payed the price. Regardless of past experiences or their feelings for one another he was in the right to execute him after giving him multiple choices to comply beforehand.

I never questioned Jon's right to execute Slynt. That would be silly. What I question is whether it was the right thing to do, and whether it was done for the right reasons.

1 hour ago, Rufus Snow said:

I would expect there to be a written agreement in Jon's papers; the Iron Bank don't strike me as the sort to rely on the spoken word and a handshake.

I assume that, too. But such papers first have to be found, and Nestoris has to return his copy to Braavos.

1 hour ago, Rufus Snow said:

Practically, it would also make more sense for it to be a line of credit rather than an upfront loan - why bother dragging gold across the narrow sea when it would just be so much easier to ship the bills across to the Bank for settlement? I know there's nothing in the text one way or the other, but as the iron Bank is now the largest in the known world, I bet they've got their shit together by now

I could actually see Stannis and his representatives just hiring sellswords with some letter of credit from the Iron Bank, and I think that could also work when you want to buy food in White Harbor or Gulltown - but for that you would have to send representatives down to those cities.

[Rufus Snow]

24 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Nestoris has to return his copy to Braavos

Not necessarily, I can think of ways it could be done - more to the point, so can GRRM if the story demands it

Either way, we can only speculate until it happens...

[Starkz]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

While this is not an impossible scenario, I imagine that if a bunch a few hundred of slavers were put in a cell to determine what 163 members of their circle are going to be killed they would likely pick (also) those who are actually responsible for the thing that put them all in this situation. That's just a part of group dynamics. Replace 'slavers' with 'Nazis' and 'those who are actually responsible' with Hitler, Göring, Goebbels, Himmler, etc. and you get the meaning. 

Now, we don't know how they chose them, but I find it not unlikely that some of the crucified slavers were indeed some of them who were responsible for the crucifixion of the children.

Mob mentality mixed with power is the perfect combination for getting what you want in a society such as theirs. It’s highly unlikely that a vast majority of the slavers were crucifing people and more so that the main ones responsible faced justice. They’re probably now leading the Harpy’s and hopefully will face justice in the next book. Going off of logic individual slavers didn’t just point to each other and say “crucify him”. A group of slavers, the most influential and powerful ones choose who would be punished thinking otherwise that the minority small slavers choose them is ridiculous. Either way I imagine they will eventually be dealt with and Daenerys will be the one getting off scot-free per usual.

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, Starkz said:

Mob mentality mixed with power is the perfect combination for getting what you want in a society such as theirs. It’s highly unlikely that a vast majority of the slavers were crucifing people and more so that the main ones responsible faced justice.

What we little we do know about Meereen implies that the class of the slavers - the Great Masters - collectively ruled the city of Meereen - just as the Wise Masters and the Good Masters rule(d) Yunkai and Astapor, respectively.

This implies that they would all share responsibility for the crucifixion of the slave children, just as they are collectively responsible for the war they waged against Daenerys. The idea of collective punishment is not unheard of in Martinworld (it is practiced in form of the hostage system and the attainder/eradication of noble houses in Westeros, too), so I don't see an inherent problem when a collective body of people are collectively punished for crimes they committed.

In fact, if a nation is accused of a war crime and has to make reparations and the like, such reparations are demanded from the entire nation, being paid by all the people, not just the guilty/warmongering leaders. Dany didn't punish all Meereen for what Meereen's leaders did to those children.

One can certainly ask whether Dany was particularly smart there, but since the whole episode isn't elaborated on all that much I don't feel all that comfortable speculating a lot about it. Obviously doesn't care to humanize the slavers and depict the (possible) humanity of some of the slavers (in light of the way he portrayed the Yunkai'i Wise Masters in ADwD such humanity would most likely not add much nuance to them).

But honestly, the dynamics I'd see if the Great Masters had to collectively decide who had to die in some great discussion, chances are very high that those seen as the instigators of the crucifixion idea are most likely among the chosen - they would be the people the body of assembled slavers would collectively blame for the situation they and their families are now in.

2 hours ago, Starkz said:

They’re probably now leading the Harpy’s and hopefully will face justice in the next book.

Since apparently House Pahl was a very prominent house before Dany's arrival (and is now without male leaders) I find it very unlikely that the truly guilty of the crucifixion plot escaped the cross. I could be wrong, but it doesn't seem as if George cares much for that particular plot line considering nobody actually mentions it in ADwD.

And the Harpy seems to be Galazza Galare, who is from a relatively minor and obscure slaver house. She is only in a position of prominence and influence because she is the Green Grace of Meereen.

2 hours ago, Starkz said:

Going off of logic individual slavers didn’t just point to each other and say “crucify him”. A group of slavers, the most influential and powerful ones choose who would be punished thinking otherwise that the minority small slavers choose them is ridiculous. Either way I imagine they will eventually be dealt with and Daenerys will be the one getting off scot-free per usual.

I actually don't think Dany will be there when Meereen explodes. Two dragons are on the loose, the horn is about to be blown, the Ironborn are there, the Yunkish allies will be crushed, and the Volantenes will arrive soon. Dany's people don't need Dany to reach a point where they have to deal with the enemy on the inside. Tyrion is ideally suited to help Barristan get to the bottom of this plot quickly. And then there won't be any mercy for the people involved. Not after they tried to poison Dany.

But we really got off topic here.

[kissdbyfire]

Can we get back on track? Dany and her Targ coin still flipping up in the air belong elsewhere...

 

[Clegane'sPup]

38 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Can we get back on track? Dany and her Targ coin still flipping up in the air belong elsewhere...

 

 Let me try to help get back on track. Rheagar and Lyanna's son was chosen to lead the NW and he beheaded Slynt. Then there was a mutiny.

 

[Starkz]

59 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

What we little we do know about Meereen implies that the class of the slavers - the Great Masters - collectively ruled the city of Meereen - just as the Wise Masters and the Good Masters rule(d) Yunkai and Astapor, respectively.

This implies that they would all share responsibility for the crucifixion of the slave children, just as they are collectively responsible for the war they waged against Daenerys. The idea of collective punishment is not unheard of in Martinworld (it is practiced in form of the hostage system and the attainder/eradication of noble houses in Westeros, too), so I don't see an inherent problem when a collective body of people are collectively punished for crimes they committed.

In fact, if a nation is accused of a war crime and has to make reparations and the like, such reparations are demanded from the entire nation, being paid by all the people, not just the guilty/warmongering leaders. Dany didn't punish all Meereen for what Meereen's leaders did to those children.

One can certainly ask whether Dany was particularly smart there, but since the whole episode isn't elaborated on all that much I don't feel all that comfortable speculating a lot about it. Obviously doesn't care to humanize the slavers and depict the (possible) humanity of some of the slavers (in light of the way he portrayed the Yunkai'i Wise Masters in ADwD such humanity would most likely not add much nuance to them).

But honestly, the dynamics I'd see if the Great Masters had to collectively decide who had to die in some great discussion, chances are very high that those seen as the instigators of the crucifixion idea are most likely among the chosen - they would be the people the body of assembled slavers would collectively blame for the situation they and their families are now in.

Since apparently House Pahl was a very prominent house before Dany's arrival (and is now without male leaders) I find it very unlikely that the truly guilty of the crucifixion plot escaped the cross. I could be wrong, but it doesn't seem as if George cares much for that particular plot line considering nobody actually mentions it in ADwD.

And the Harpy seems to be Galazza Galare, who is from a relatively minor and obscure slaver house. She is only in a position of prominence and influence because she is the Green Grace of Meereen.

I actually don't think Dany will be there when Meereen explodes. Two dragons are on the loose, the horn is about to be blown, the Ironborn are there, the Yunkish allies will be crushed, and the Volantenes will arrive soon. Dany's people don't need Dany to reach a point where they have to deal with the enemy on the inside. Tyrion is ideally suited to help Barristan get to the bottom of this plot quickly. And then there won't be any mercy for the people involved. Not after they tried to poison Dany.

But we really got off topic here.

I agree I don’t think George was that fixated on the crucifications and just included it to show Dany can be a tough leader. Breaking it down there are discrepancies which is why we’re speculation this in the first place. I think George tried to write it in a way where they met justice but it’s open to a lot of interpretation. I see what you’re saying about people pointing out the guilty as a collective society but when it is controlled by the ones who are guilty they’re not going to let that happen to themselves. With such a large number of slavers they can’t all be involved in decision making. Regardless I think George was trying to depict that the guilty were punished and the other bystanders who allowed it to happen(Not sure if they could of even stopped it but like I said, one of the many things up for interpretation whether they could or even wanted to) but in my own POV it’s highly unlikely that all of these things would line up correctly to where all of the guilty and no “innocent” slavers were.

[Clegane'sPup]

4 minutes ago, Starkz said:

I agree I don’t think George was that fixated on the crucifications and just included it to show Dany can be a tough leader. Breaking it down there are discrepancies which is why we’re speculation this in the first place. I think George tried to write it in a way where they met justice but it’s open to a lot of interpretation. I see what you’re saying about people pointing out the guilty as a collective society but when it is controlled by the ones who are guilty they’re not going to let that happen to themselves. With such a large number of slavers they can’t all be involved in decision making. Regardless I think George was trying to depict that the guilty were punished and the other bystanders who allowed it to happen(Not sure if they could of even stopped it but like I said, one of the many things up for interpretation whether they could or even wanted to) but in my own POV it’s highly unlikely that all of these things would line up correctly to where all of the guilty and no “innocent” slavers were.

The above ^ has nada to do with Jon Snow, the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna. It also has nothing to do with the topic.

[Starkz]

Going back to Janos, killing him was a smart move albeit that it could of been fueled a bit by emotion, though he seemed indifferent in the killing of him. If he had immediately killed him after he refused I would think it was wrong but he had multiple chances which is the most important thing. He forfeited his own life by not taking advantage of any of the chances. Janos was a threat to the NW and Jon’s leadership if he refused Jon’s command or wouldn’t follow him in a life/death situation the repercussions could cause a lot of people to die.

[Lord Varys]

7 minutes ago, Starkz said:

I agree I don’t think George was that fixated on the crucifications and just included it to show Dany can be a tough leader. Breaking it down there are discrepancies which is why we’re speculation this in the first place. I think George tried to write it in a way where they met justice but it’s open to a lot of interpretation. I see what you’re saying about people pointing out the guilty as a collective society but when it is controlled by the ones who are guilty they’re not going to let that happen to themselves. With such a large number of slavers they can’t all be involved in decision making. Regardless I think George was trying to depict that the guilty were punished and the other bystanders who allowed it to happen(Not sure if they could of even stopped it but like I said, one of the many things up for interpretation whether they could or even wanted to) but in my own POV it’s highly unlikely that all of these things would line up correctly to where all of the guilty and no “innocent” slavers were.

We don't even know how this things worked. Did Dany put all heads of the families in some big room and demanded that they give her 163 names? Or did she approach each house individually that they give her names until she got her 163? We don't know. Different approaches would give us different results. In the second scenario one might assume that old and done for people would volunteer/be chosen so that the younger blood of the family could survive. Older guys often are in important positions, so ... who knows.

[Aline de Gavrillac]

I suppose now that JonSnow is dead, the Iron Bank will support Bowen Marsh.  Somebody will have make good on those loans.  Bowen Marsh, the accountant, might actually be more reliable than Jon.  I'm hoping Bowen can gather enough men together and push the wildlings out of Castle Black.  There is no need to share the food with them when they would rather leave the wall to fight the Boltons instead of helping out at the wall.  

[Clegane'sPup]

ummmmmmm hint not taken. @Lord Varysand @Starkz  get a room or start a new thread/tread.

[Lord Varys]

4 minutes ago, Clegane'sPup said:

ummmmmmm hint not taken. @Lord Varysand @Starkz  get a room or start a new thread/tread.

Well, I guess I'm out of here. Or has anybody to contribute anything of substance?