Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I don't get into logic debates when it comes to this show because it's not the real story.  I just want to point out that what we saw is the reality of war.  Every war kills civilians.  It's not only the soldiers who died when the Americans dropped the atom bombs in Japan.  A half-assed, uncommitted attitude will result in losing the war for your side.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Centurion Piso said:

I don't get into logic debates when it comes to this show because it's not the real story.  I just want to point out that what we saw is the reality of war.  Every war kills civilians.  It's not only the soldiers who died when the Americans dropped the atom bombs in Japan.  A half-assed, uncommitted attitude will result in losing the war for your side.  

You do realize that people have debated the morality and wisdom of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, right? And just because civilians die in war doesn't mean you have to kill all the civilians you can just for the heck of it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting how the stone walls blew up as if they were all filled with gunpowder from dragonfire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, darmody said:

You do realize that people have debated the morality and wisdom of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, right? And just because civilians die in war doesn't mean you have to kill all the civilians you can just for the heck of it. 

It's not for the heck of it.  Bottom line, strategic goal is to destroy the enemy.  Part of that is to destroy the population. because when there is no enemy population, there is no enemy, and the goal is to destroy the enemy.  Which is why civilians suffered throughout the history, they were a strategic enemy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Centurion Piso said:

  I just want to point out that what we saw is the reality of war.  Every war kills civilians.  It's not only the soldiers who died when the Americans dropped the atom bombs in Japan.  

She genocided them after they surrendered. There's a huge difference between coleteral damage and deliberate murder of thousands. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Hoo said:

It's not for the heck of it.  Bottom line, strategic goal is to destroy the enemy.  Part of that is to destroy the population. because when there is no enemy population, there is no enemy, and the goal is to destroy the enemy.  Which is why civilians suffered throughout the history, they were a strategic enemy. 

What? No. There's no indication the people of King's Landing were seen as hostile. Except insofar as they hadn't risen up against Evil Queen Cersei. But that was true when Danny landed at Dragonstone last season, and back then she avoided burning them all with three dragons and no mounted ballistas to stop them.

Anyway, she had an army to control the civilian population. There was no reason to believe Jon and Greyworm didn't have things in hand. 

Edited by darmody

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Hoo said:

Bottom line, strategic goal is to destroy the enemy.  Part of that is to destroy the population.

What the hell? It is HER people she wants the rule. Not some foreign kingdom she will conquer and replace. 

 

10 minutes ago, Hoo said:

because when there is no enemy population, there is no enemy, and the goal is to destroy the enemy. 

It doesn't work this way for succession wars and coups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Centurion Piso said:

I don't get into logic debates when it comes to this show because it's not the real story.  I just want to point out that what we saw is the reality of war.  Every war kills civilians.  It's not only the soldiers who died when the Americans dropped the atom bombs in Japan.  A half-assed, uncommitted attitude will result in losing the war for your side.  

Well here the thing about that it was done to make the japanese surrender. Guess what happened just BEFORE fake dany massacred civilians. That's right KL surrendered. She had no reason to do it. I liked dany and say this is way out of character for her. What you were talking about was the carpet bombing in WW2. Guess how well that worked in germany? In japan they had wiped out entire cities with firebombs. The overwhelming destruction that one bomb did was what caused them to surrender. that and the fact that if they didn't the soviets would have invaded them since they were getting ready to. It was a mixture of things but guess what. They did it to MAKE THEM SURRENDER! Once they did surrender we stopped. This would be like them surrendering and the US kept going. Before she attacked the civilians after the bell rang yeah she was playing to win and knew there would be collateral damage. However after that it...this whole thing made no sense in so many ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Nudu said:

What the hell? It is HER people she wants the rule. Not some foreign kingdom she will conquer and replace. 

They were not her people.  They did not come out in support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Hoo said:

It's not for the heck of it.  Bottom line, strategic goal is to destroy the enemy.  Part of that is to destroy the population. because when there is no enemy population, there is no enemy, and the goal is to destroy the enemy

I agree she didn’t kill them for “the heck of it” but I don’t think she saw the people of KL as the enemy. I think she saw them as dispensable in sending a very powerful message about her strength and ruthlessness to anyone who is thinking about opposing her. The burned remains of KL and its inhabitants will serve as an example of what she can and will do to maintain her rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, a girl knows nothing said:

I agree she didn’t kill them for “the heck of it” but I don’t think she saw the people of KL as the enemy. I think she saw them as dispensable in sending a very powerful message about her strength and ruthlessness to anyone who is thinking about opposing her. The burned remains of KL and its inhabitants will serve as an example of what she can and will do to maintain her rule.

On top of that, by leaving virtually no survivors she now has the opportunity to spin what happened as Cirse's fault.  The official narrative should be that the bells were never run, that Cirse fought to the end, and Dany's only choice was to raze the city.  To the victor goes the history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about Cersei? Does the surrendence move means that Cersei would come out of this alive and accept Dany as her ruler? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, olibar said:

On top of that, by leaving virtually no survivors she now has the opportunity to spin what happened as Cirse's fault.  The official narrative should be that the bells were never run, that Cirse fought to the end, and Dany's only choice was to raze the city.  To the victor goes the history.

She doesn't have that opportunity, actually. Jon was there, Tyrion was there, Arya and I assume Davos were there. Countless other witnesses who aren't dead. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Nightwish said:

What about Cersei? Does the surrendence move means that Cersei would come out of this alive and accept Dany as her ruler? 

Cersei would have been captured. She didn't appear to have an escape plan, and her fleet was destroyed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, darmody said:

Cersei would have been captured. She didn't appear to have an escape plan, and her fleet was destroyed. 

So she didn’t accept the surrendence as she probably wanted to kill Cersei and spit on her face the “innocents” shield Cersei had put between her and Dany. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Nightwish said:

So she didn’t accept the surrendence as she probably wanted to kill Cersei and spit on her face the “innocents” shield Cersei had put between her and Dany. 

Well, if Danny was upset during the 30 second delay from when she heard the bells to when she started killing civilians far away from Cersei, she could have flown to where she thought Cersei'd be and kill her there. 

Edited by darmody

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, darmody said:

Well, if Danny was upset with the 30 second delay from when she heard the bells to when she started killing civilians far away from Cersei, she could have flown to where she thought Cersei'd be and kill her there. 

I don’t think she was upset by the delay, I am just thinking she didn’t accept the surrendence and continued her war, after watching the Red Keep from afar. Apparently killing the civilians was a demonstration of power in the face of Cersei who wanted to use them as a shield. 

And also to demonstrate to all why they needed to fear her. 

Edited by Nightwish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, darmody said:

Well, if Danny was upset during the 30 second delay from when she heard the bells to when she started killing civilians far away from Cersei, she could have flown to where she thought Cersei'd be and kill her there. 

EXACTLY Why hit the red keep last.  The fake dany the show keepers made this episode attacked the innocent people before finishing the job. Why she ignored cersei and gave her time to leave. If cersei had left two minutes earlier she might have made it out. I say again this made no sense on any level. it was out of character and it shattered her character and then ran over the pieces with a steam roller.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Centurion Piso said:

I don't get into logic debates when it comes to this show because it's not the real story.  I just want to point out that what we saw is the reality of war.  Every war kills civilians.  It's not only the soldiers who died when the Americans dropped the atom bombs in Japan.  A half-assed, uncommitted attitude will result in losing the war for your side.  

People that had reservations about the atom bombs: Generals Eisenhower and McArthur. Admirals Nimitz, Halsey, and Leahy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×