The North is finally independent

[Erkan12]

Robb would've been proud, he died for it, but the North accomplished the vision that he has started.

The endgame was successful for the Starks, now all Sansa needs to do is finding a husband that would take her name as a Stark.

[RYShh]

Why did Jon care about the people in the South? To save people and avenge the children? He cared about the North, and the North was safe. He could return to the North and let other people like Varys or Tyrion to plot against her and kill Daenerys anyway, Daenerys could destroy herself just fine. After Daenerys refusing Jon's wish to spare the Imp, all Jon needed to say ''I am going out of here, I don't want any incest with my aunt in my life, and I am going to marry with a nice girl from the North and live in the Winterfell, you can do whatever you want. You can keep killing and executing people left and right. You want a lover?  I heard about Daario, call him back.'' 

Ned was going to return to North and he was going to do this to Robert when Robert wanted to kill Daenerys and her unborn child, since Ned was unlucky in the KL from beginning somehow Catelyn captures the Imp and Jaime hears it in the right moment and attacks Ned on the streets and then Ned decides to stay. Jon's role model was Ned, so he could say ''the hell with it, I am going to North'', what was Daenerys going to do? Jon was Warden of the North, was she going to say ''No, Warden of the North can't return to the North, I want you to stay here.'' and keep abusing him while he doesn't want to stay? I don't believe she could do it, or could she go that far?

If this is about mentioning Winterfell, it doesn't make sense, Sansa is right about Daenerys, but she needs to obey and shut her mouth about it, she can't plot against Daenerys, and Daenerys couldn't kill her because of not liking her, as long as they stay in the North and not plotting against Daenerys they are fine, it's not like Daenerys was going to return to the North, she wouldn't even go there, they could live without a problem in the North and Daenerys would destroy herself due to being lonely in the South anyways, or she could fine some toady nobles in her own court and she could play her little games with them. She said Dorne to Winterfell anyway, not specifically Winterfell, also said Lannisport etc,

I am not saying Jon did the wrong thing by killing her, but he could ignore her and return to North and live as Warden of the North for the rest of his days, Daenerys was doomed from the beginning anyway, why bother for the people in the South and risk your neck for it? Idiots like Yara Greyjoy didn't even thank Jon instead they wanted to kill him for killing Daenerys. They are obviously not worthy to save it.

The only good thing that comes out of this mess is the independence of the North, that's the only consolation I guess. Jon sacrificed himself for the realm, I guess he will do nothing until another huge threat shows up for the realm.

[Nowy Tends]

Thread approved by the Seven Hell's Angels chapters of Wintertown, Deepwood Motte and Thorren Square.

[Kajjo]

1 hour ago, RYShh said:

Why did Jon care about the people in the South?

Well, Job has a good heart and cares for a lot, even for the South.

However, the main point is that Daenerys clearly threatened Winterfell and Sansa in her victory speech. Jon had to intervene. Jon had to decide bewteen "his sisters and the North" and "Daenerys and her liberation of the world".

Daenerys clearly turned into a megalomaniac tyrant. Her victory speech was gross and nothing good to be expected anymore. Someone had to finish her off. She was a danger to the world.

1 hour ago, RYShh said:

He could return to the North and let other people like Varys or Tyrion to plot against her and kill Daenerys anyway

Vary was already dead. He had been executed by Daenerys. Tyrion was captured and waited for execution. You cannot seriously expect them to have had any options.

 

[Br16]

On 5/20/2019 at 6:19 PM, Erkan12 said:

 now all Sansa needs to do is finding a husband that would take her name as a Stark.

Which bannerman's son do you think she is going to marry? My guess is that a marriage alliance with the Manderlys would probably be the most fruitful in terms of wealth and power.

[RYShh]

2 hours ago, Kajjo said:

Well, Job has a good heart and cares for a lot, even for the South.

However, the main point is that Daenerys clearly threatened Winterfell and Sansa in her victory speech. Jon had to intervene. Jon had to decide bewteen "his sisters and the North" and "Daenerys and her liberation of the world".

Daenerys clearly turned into a megalomaniac tyrant. Her victory speech was gross and nothing good to be expected anymore. Someone had to finish her off. She was a danger to the world.

Vary was already dead. He had been executed by Daenerys. Tyrion was captured and waited for execution. You cannot seriously expect them to have had any options.

 

So you believe she would fly over Winterfell and burn them? For what crime? Because of telling the truth? That's not treason at all, all Sansa did was telling the truth to Tyrion, and she did nothing wrong, Daenerys had no evidence to execute Sansa, if anything else Tyrion did the worse and he was still not a traitor until he freed Jaime.

I mean there will be always people like LF, Olenna or Varys, especially in the capital, one day she would drink the wrong cup and it would be over for her, I don't see any reason for Jon to stay in the capital unless she insists which I don't see she could force ''Warden of the North'' to stay in the capital, his place was in the North after all.

[Haskelltier]

On 5/20/2019 at 12:19 PM, Erkan12 said:

Robb would've been proud, he died for it, but the North accomplished the vision that he has started.

No, he died, because he fucked the wrong woman in a moment of weakness and felt honourbound to marry her. As a consequence he couldn't fullfill his his oath with the Freys, so that a combination of Roose Bolton, Walder Frey and Tywin Lannister brought him down in what is known as the Red Wedding.

4 hours ago, RYShh said:

Why did Jon care about the people in the South? To save people and avenge the children? He cared about the North, and the North was safe. He could return to the North and let other people like Varys or Tyrion to plot against her and kill Daenerys anyway, Daenerys could destroy herself just fine. After Daenerys refusing Jon's wish to spare the Imp, all Jon needed to say ''I am going out of here, I don't want any incest with my aunt in my life, and I am going to marry with a nice girl from the North and live in the Winterfell, you can do whatever you want. You can keep killing and executing people left and right. You want a lover?  I heard about Daario, call him back.'' 

No, the North was not save. Daenerys definitely wanted the North to be a part of her Seven Kingdoms. And then she wanted to "liberate" the world (meaning, her being the empress of the world) with her dragon and armies with fire and blood. By adding 1 and 1 you can come to the conclusion that the North would definitely be a target if Sansa doesn't bend the knee properly.

4 hours ago, RYShh said:

I am not saying Jon did the wrong thing by killing her, but he could ignore her and return to North and live as Warden of the North for the rest of his days, Daenerys was doomed from the beginning anyway, why bother for the people in the South and risk your neck for it? Idiots like Yara Greyjoy didn't even thank Jon instead they wanted to kill him for killing Daenerys. They are obviously not worthy to save it.

And having mad Daenerys with the equivalent of a nuke sitting directly in front of your door with the permanent uncertainty of her next moves? That are enough reasons for lot of sleepless nights (or not if she decides to take Winterfell with fire and blood).

4 hours ago, RYShh said:

The only good thing that comes out of this mess is the independence of the North, that's the only consolation I guess. Jon sacrificed himself for the realm, I guess he will do nothing until another huge threat shows up for the realm.

I don't think that going back in the direction of a Westeros with seven or more independent kingdoms would be a good thing, because as history of Westeros has shown, there was always war between two or more of these kingdoms. Compare that with the better Targaryen kings who ruled the Seven Kingdoms for decades without a greater war.

23 minutes ago, RYShh said:

So you believe she would fly over Winterfell and burn them? For what crime? Because of telling the truth? That's not treason at all, all Sansa did was telling the truth to Tyrion, and she did nothing wrong, Daenerys had no evidence to execute Sansa, if anything else Tyrion did the worse and he was still not a traitor until he freed Jaime.

Well, Sansa undermined Daenery's position as queen by telling everyone that there was someone with a better claim to the Iron Throne. She could have spoken directly with Daenerys to settle the matter, but no, she told Tyrion who told Varys who wanted to tell everyone else, which could have easily resulted in a rebellion against Daenerys. That would have made her rule very difficult. In addition to that, have you seen mad Dany burning half of Kingslanding with thousands of innocent people, who didn't fought against her but "accidentally" lived in the city, she wanted to conquer? And you think such a person would need a "crime" or hard "evidence" to burn Winterfell?

[RYShh]

58 minutes ago, Haskelltier said:

No, he died, because he fucked the wrong woman in a moment of weakness and felt honourbound to marry her. As a consequence he couldn't fullfill his his oath with the Freys, so that a combination of Roose Bolton, Walder Frey and Tywin Lannister brought him down in what is known as the Red Wedding.

No, the North was not save. Daenerys definitely wanted the North to be a part of her Seven Kingdoms. And then she wanted to "liberate" the world (meaning, her being the empress of the world) with her dragon and armies with fire and blood. By adding 1 and 1 you can come to the conclusion that the North would definitely be a target if Sansa doesn't bend the knee properly.

And having mad Daenerys with the equivalent of a nuke sitting directly in front of your door with the permanent uncertainty of her next moves? That are enough reasons for lot of sleepless nights (or not if she decides to take Winterfell with fire and blood).

I don't think that going back in the direction of a Westeros with seven or more independent kingdoms would be a good thing, because as history of Westeros has shown, there was always war between two or more of these kingdoms. Compare that with the better Targaryen kings who ruled the Seven Kingdoms for decades without a greater war.

Well, Sansa undermined Daenery's position as queen by telling everyone that there was someone with a better claim to the Iron Throne. She could have spoken directly with Daenerys to settle the matter, but no, she told Tyrion who told Varys who wanted to tell everyone else, which could have easily resulted in a rebellion against Daenerys. That would have made her rule very difficult. In addition to that, have you seen mad Dany burning half of Kingslanding with thousands of innocent people, who didn't fought against her but "accidentally" lived in the city, she wanted to conquer? And you think such a person would need a "crime" or hard "evidence" to burn Winterfell?

If Robb stayed as Lord of Winterfell, he would never be a target of the Lannisters in the first place. He would declare for Stannis and Lannisters would aim for Stannis's head first after Blackwater not for Robb, Robb couldn't do anything to them without his crown so they wouldn't go far enough to kill him in a wedding and Lannisters wouldn't give those privileges to the Freys and the Boltons.

As Jon said, Sansa doesn't get to choose, she needed to shut up and obey.

Also if her last Dragon is the only problem then Jon could plot an ambush with scorpions and kill her last Dragon and went back to North and declare it's independency. Daenerys couldn't do anything with that remaining Unsullied and Dothraki army and without the back up of the Vale, North and Riverlands. They already didn't want to obey her, if they see she had no dragon left she would have no chance in Westeros. As far as I see directly killing her was the quickest and painless way for her to lose. She should've felt the pain of being powerless first then lose in time. As you say, since it's dangerous enough to be called ''nuke'', and killing the only person that can control that nuke makes no sense in the first place. Deactivate and remove that nuke first, not the person that controls it. I guess that was the easiest way for the writers to end the show. Luckily, her last Dragon somehow decides to not kill Jon, and not attack the Westeros and silently goes to East and Essos.

People always fought for the Iron Throne since Aegon the Conqueror, always civil wars since then, it's not even comparable to those little border battles between the kingdoms, show me a great conflict like Robert's Rebellion, several Blackfyre rebellions, Dance of the Dragons or War of the Five Kings before the Targaryens? Only Andal Invasion, and after that there wasn't any big wars in the Westeros, and there is no need for it anyway because every kingdom would stay in their own kingdom and not try to seize the power in the capital.

That's Daenerys's problem not Sansa's. Tyrion is Daenerys's hand, why telling Daenerys's hand is a crime suddenly? If Daenerys doesn't even trust her own hand then that doesn't make Sansa a traitor, Tyrion should've gone to Daenerys, not Sansa. Sansa is not Daenerys's hand and she doesn't need to talk with her directly, she is not even Wardenness of the North, Jon is the Warden of the North. Sansa has no business with Daenerys in the first place.

[WeDoNotKneel_HailMance]

1 hour ago, RYShh said:

So you believe she would fly over Winterfell and burn them? For what crime? Because of telling the truth? That's not treason at all, all Sansa did was telling the truth to Tyrion, and she did nothing wrong, Daenerys had no evidence to execute Sansa, if anything else Tyrion did the worse and he was still not a traitor until he freed Jaime.

I mean, first of all, think of Aegon's conquest. He just...conquered. Dany made it pretty clear with Jon & Sansa throughout S7 & S8 that she wasn't OK with an independent north. So, if Sansa was going to declare independence, that would be open rebellion, and yes Dany would fly to Winterfell and threaten to burn it down unless Sansa bends the knee. 

Second of all, Sansa told Tyrion "what if there is someone better" and that could easily be twisted into her conspiring against Dany. 

[WeDoNotKneel_HailMance]

1 hour ago, Haskelltier said:

Well, Sansa undermined Daenery's position as queen by telling everyone that there was someone with a better claim to the Iron Throne. She could have spoken directly with Daenerys to settle the matter, but no, she told Tyrion who told Varys who wanted to tell everyone else, which could have easily resulted in a rebellion against Daenerys. That would have made her rule very difficult. In addition to that, have you seen mad Dany burning half of Kingslanding with thousands of innocent people, who didn't fought against her but "accidentally" lived in the city, she wanted to conquer? And you think such a person would need a "crime" or hard "evidence" to burn Winterfell?

This.

[RYShh]

12 minutes ago, WeDoNotKneel_HailMance said:

I mean, first of all, think of Aegon's conquest. He just...conquered. Dany made it pretty clear with Jon & Sansa throughout S7 & S8 that she wasn't OK with an independent north. So, if Sansa was going to declare independence, that would be open rebellion, and yes Dany would fly to Winterfell and threaten to burn it down unless Sansa bends the knee. 

Second of all, Sansa told Tyrion "what if there is someone better" and that could easily be twisted into her conspiring against Dany. 

Sansa couldn't do such a thing like declaring indepencence, Jon is the Warden of the North, not Sansa. Where do you get that? If she did, of course she would get murdered for it. Not only for betraying Daenerys, also for betraying Jon. But she did no such a thing. Why is it matters what she said to Tyrion? That's Tyrion's problem, not Sansa's. Tyrion is Daenerys's hand after all. Sansa did nothing, Tyrion went and mentioned it to Varys without telling Daenerys first, then Varys plotted against her, not Sansa.

[WeDoNotKneel_HailMance]

12 minutes ago, RYShh said:

Sansa couldn't do such a thing like declaring indepencence, Jon is the Warden of the North, not Sansa. Where do you get that?

From Sansa's mouth...she makes it pretty clear here (watch starting at 2:55) that the North will not be bending the knee. 

 

[hewman]

On 5/20/2019 at 1:19 PM, Erkan12 said:

Robb would've been proud, he died for it, but the North accomplished the vision that he has started.

 

Non roman citizens living in the Roman Empire - although towards the end they were all made roman citizens - hated their rulers, and for good reasons I’m sure, but, in the end I think they enjoyed a more peaceful and generally a life of a better quality then the “independents”. 

[WeDoNotKneel_HailMance]

47 minutes ago, RYShh said:

Why is it matters what she said to Tyrion? That's Tyrion's problem, not Sansa's. Tyrion is Daenerys's hand after all. Sansa did nothing,

Hmmm so your argument is that a monarch's own hand is the only one who can be accused of treason or commit treason? Apologies, but this isn't accurate in Westeros. Let's see here... 

• When Samwell tells Jon about his parentage, Jon's response is... "Daenerys is our Queen. That's treason." 
• Sansa makes 2 charges against Littlefinger before he's executed, murder and treason
• And there's like 100 more examples of this in our story... 
  • Renly Baratheon stands accused of treason (by both Joffrey and Stannis) by declaring himself King 
  • Brandon Stark (son of Rickard) was arrested for treason by Aerys for protesting the kidnapping of Lyanna Stark 
  • Lord Karstark murdering Lannister prisoners is called treason by Robb, he's beheaded for it, and Karstark in turn accuses Catelyn of treason for letting Jaime go
  • Tywin and Littlefinger discuss the treason of House Tyrell rebelling against Joffrey with Renly 
  • Stannis calls Robb, Joffrey, and Renly all "thieves" that will "bend the knees or be destroyed" (he doesn't use the word treason, but this is what he's saying) 

By speaking against the current monarch in favor of another, or in any way acting against the current monarch, you are committing treason. In Westeros, anyone can commit treason and be punished for it (there is no freedom of speech). ANYONE. Including Sansa Stark. 

[RYShh]

1 hour ago, WeDoNotKneel_HailMance said:

From Sansa's mouth...she makes it pretty clear here (watch starting at 2:55) that the North will not be bending the knee. 

 

She asks it, she shows what she wants, not everyone gets what they want or it means that they will commit treason for that, how is that mean she will not bend the knee?  She already did. As Jon said, ''she doesn't get to choose'' , he can't be more clear than that. Sansa can't do anything about it, and she committed no crime. If she did, Daenerys would burn Sansa alongside with Varys. But she did no such a thing.

57 minutes ago, WeDoNotKneel_HailMance said:

Hmmm so your argument is that a monarch's own hand is the only one who can be accused of treason or commit treason? Apologies, but this isn't accurate in Westeros. Let's see here... 

• When Samwell tells Jon about his parentage, Jon's response is... "Daenerys is our Queen. That's treason." 
• Sansa makes 2 charges against Littlefinger before he's executed, murder and treason
• And there's like 100 more examples of this in our story... 
  • Renly Baratheon stands accused of treason (by both Joffrey and Stannis) by declaring himself King 
  • Brandon Stark (son of Rickard) was arrested for treason by Aerys for protesting the kidnapping of Lyanna Stark 
  • Lord Karstark murdering Lannister prisoners is called treason by Robb, he's beheaded for it, and Karstark in turn accuses Catelyn of treason for letting Jaime go
  • Tywin and Littlefinger discuss the treason of House Tyrell rebelling against Joffrey with Renly 
  • Stannis calls Robb, Joffrey, and Renly all "thieves" that will "bend the knees or be destroyed" (he doesn't use the word treason, but this is what he's saying) 

By speaking against the current monarch in favor of another, or in any way acting against the current monarch, you are committing treason. In Westeros, anyone can commit treason and be punished for it (there is no freedom of speech). ANYONE. Including Sansa Stark. 

So in your mind telling the truth about Jon to Tyrion, who is the hand of Daenerys, is a treason against Daenerys?  Sam tells him ''it's the truth'' , it's not a treason unless Jon breaks faith with Daenerys. None of the examples you say suits with this.

[WeDoNotKneel_HailMance]

1 hour ago, RYShh said:

She asks it, she shows what she wants, not everyone gets what they want or it means that they will commit treason for that, how is that mean she will not bend the knee? 

OK. We will have to agree to disagree on Sansa's intentions regarding northern independence. I was just going by exactly what Sansa said (we said we'd never bow to anyone else again)  directly to Queen Dany. 

 

1 hour ago, RYShh said:

So in your mind telling the truth about Jon to Tyrion, who is the hand of Daenerys, is a treason against Daenerys?  Sam tells him ''it's the truth'' , it's not a treason unless Jon breaks faith with Daenerys. None of the examples you say suits with this.

Ugh. I'm not basing this on my opinion or what's in my mind, I'm making an argument based on a) the definition of treason and b) the character behaviors and social norms established in Westeros. Your original argument was that what Sansa said didn't matter because she wasn't Dany's hand, Tyrion is. The point of the examples was to refute that - they show that in Westeros, anyone can commit treason by acting against a monarch (or self-proclaimed monarch).

The person committing treason is trying to overthrow or undermine the current monarch. Their logic is that if they succeed in their treason they will gain power or make the world better. And if they don't succeed, most times they will suffer the consequences of the monarch punishing them for that treason. Sometimes they do not at the discretion of the monarch (e.g., Joffrey/Tywin didn't punish the Tyrell's treason against Joffrey because the Tyrells helped defeat Stannis). This post is already way too long, apologies, but let's explain a few situations: 

• Sam telling Jon he is the rightful heir is treason against Daenerys. Sam is trying to convince Jon that Jon should be king and the world would be better with Jon ruling vs Dany. Sam saying it's the truth is Sam trying justifying this treason to Jon. Sam appears to be fully aware he's committing treason against Daenerys.
• Jon telling his family about his parentage is not treason, because he asks them to swear to secrecy and presumably makes it clear that he does not want the throne and is not acting to overthrow Dany (due to terrible writing, this was offscreen, but its consistent with everything else Jon has ever said about the matter - ma queen, I don't want it).
• Sansa telling Tyrion about Jon's parentage is treason against Daenerys. Sansa is obviously trying to undermine Dany's claim to the throne (she says "what if there's someone else, someone better?)  She wasn't immediately punished because a) Dany needed the northern army to invade KL, b) she may not have known the specifics of the info/secret chain, or c) Sansa is Jon's sister and Dany may not want to kill Jon's sister. 
• Varys sending letter's about Jon's parentage is treason against Daenerys because Varys' intention is for Dany to be overthrown and Jon installed as king. Varys is caught by Dany while Dany is still queen, and so he faces the consequences.
• Tyrion freeing Jaime is treason against Daenerys. Jaime was helping Cersei, who was trying to overthrow Queen Dany. Tyrion is punished by being sent to the dungeon. 
• Jon killing Daenerys is treason against Daenerys. Dany is dead but Greyworm lives, so Jon is punished by being banished to The Wall. 
• Daenerys invading Westeros and taking KL is treason against Cersei. Dany isn't punished because she defeats Cersei. 
• Roose Bolton working with the Lannisters at the Red Wedding is treason against the King in the North. He wasn't punished by the Starks because his treason was successful. 
• Renly declaring himself King is treason against Stannis and against Joffrey. Stannis gives Renly punishment for this treason in the form of a Mel shadow baby. 
• Joffrey sitting the throne after Robert is treason against Stannis. He nearly faces the consequences of this at Blackwater Bay, but wins that battle to remain King.
• Cersei & Lancel instigating the death of Robert Baratheon is treason against Robert Baratheon. They initially avoided consequences, Cersei was later accused of this treason by the High Sparrow, suffers the consequence of the walk of shame, but escapes further punishment by blowing up the sept. 
• Varys working with Illyrio and Viserys to ally with the Dothraki is treason against Robert Baratheon. He's never caught and so never punished for it. 
• Robert Baratheon, Ned Stark, and Jon Arryn starting Robert's rebellion is treason against the Mad King. However, they won the war, so they faced no consequences for this treason. 

Ironically, this entire argument is a moot point because Sansa's treason against Daenerys aided in the overthrow and death of the queen, meaning Sansa wasn't required to suffer the consequences of said treason. 

 

[RYShh]

51 minutes ago, WeDoNotKneel_HailMance said:

OK. We will have to agree to disagree on Sansa's intentions regarding northern independence. I was just going by exactly what Sansa said (we said we'd never bow to anyone else again)  directly to Queen Dany. 

 

Ugh. I'm not basing this on my opinion or what's in my mind, I'm making an argument based on a) the definition of treason and b) the character behaviors and social norms established in Westeros. Your original argument was that what Sansa said didn't matter because she wasn't Dany's hand, Tyrion is. The point of the examples was to refute that - they show that in Westeros, anyone can commit treason by acting against a monarch (or self-proclaimed monarch).

The person committing treason is trying to overthrow or undermine the current monarch. Their logic is that if they succeed in their treason they will gain power or make the world better. And if they don't succeed, most times they will suffer the consequences of the monarch punishing them for that treason. Sometimes they do not at the discretion of the monarch (e.g., Joffrey/Tywin didn't punish the Tyrell's treason against Joffrey because the Tyrells helped defeat Stannis). This post is already way too long, apologies, but let's explain a few situations: 

• Sam telling Jon he is the rightful heir is treason against Daenerys. Sam is trying to convince Jon that Jon should be king and the world would be better with Jon ruling vs Dany. Sam saying it's the truth is Sam trying justifying this treason to Jon. Sam appears to be fully aware he's committing treason against Daenerys.
• Jon telling his family about his parentage is not treason, because he asks them to swear to secrecy and presumably makes it clear that he does not want the throne and is not acting to overthrow Dany (due to terrible writing, this was offscreen, but its consistent with everything else Jon has ever said about the matter - ma queen, I don't want it).
• Sansa telling Tyrion about Jon's parentage is treason against Daenerys. Sansa is obviously trying to undermine Dany's claim to the throne (she says "what if there's someone else, someone better?)  She wasn't immediately punished because a) Dany needed the northern army to invade KL, b) she may not have known the specifics of the info/secret chain, or c) Sansa is Jon's sister and Dany may not want to kill Jon's sister. 
• Varys sending letter's about Jon's parentage is treason against Daenerys because Varys' intention is for Dany to be overthrown and Jon installed as king. Varys is caught by Dany while Dany is still queen, and so he faces the consequences.
• Tyrion freeing Jaime is treason against Daenerys. Jaime was helping Cersei, who was trying to overthrow Queen Dany. Tyrion is punished by being sent to the dungeon. 
• Jon killing Daenerys is treason against Daenerys. Dany is dead but Greyworm lives, so Jon is punished by being banished to The Wall. 
• Daenerys invading Westeros and taking KL is treason against Cersei. Dany isn't punished because she defeats Cersei. 
• Roose Bolton working with the Lannisters at the Red Wedding is treason against the King in the North. He wasn't punished by the Starks because his treason was successful. 
• Renly declaring himself King is treason against Stannis and against Joffrey. Stannis gives Renly punishment for this treason in the form of a Mel shadow baby. 
• Joffrey sitting the throne after Robert is treason against Stannis. He nearly faces the consequences of this at Blackwater Bay, but wins that battle to remain King.
• Cersei & Lancel instigating the death of Robert Baratheon is treason against Robert Baratheon. They initially avoided consequences, Cersei was later accused of this treason by the High Sparrow, suffers the consequence of the walk of shame, but escapes further punishment by blowing up the sept. 
• Varys working with Illyrio and Viserys to ally with the Dothraki is treason against Robert Baratheon. He's never caught and so never punished for it. 
• Robert Baratheon, Ned Stark, and Jon Arryn starting Robert's rebellion is treason against the Mad King. However, they won the war, so they faced no consequences for this treason. 

Ironically, this entire argument is a moot point because Sansa's treason against Daenerys aided in the overthrow and death of the queen, meaning Sansa wasn't required to suffer the consequences of said treason. 

 

You didn't understand, I never said Sansa didn't want the independent North, I said she wanted, but she was not going to rebel openly against Daenerys when she knows she can't win, she is not an idiot, especially when Jon was loyal to Daenerys she knows she couldn't do anything about it, that's my point.

Again, you didn't understand or didn't want to, I said how telling the truth about Jon to Daenerys's hand Tyrion is treason exactly? It's not. Which is why she didn't even punish Tyrion (let alone Sansa) for telling that to Varys. Only Varys committed treason because only he acted against Daenerys, not Tyrion and definitely not Sansa. It doesn't matter what Sansa wants or doesn't matter what she believes, she didn't do anything. Only Varys did. Telling the truth is not undermining anyone. You're still giving irrelevant examples on this matter. Not even Daenerys said Sansa is a traitor, because she wasn't. 

[WeDoNotKneel_HailMance]

3 minutes ago, RYShh said:

Again, you didn't understand or didn't want to, I said how telling the truth about the Jon to Daenerys's hand Tyrion is a treason exactly? It's not.

OK. I will try to understand. What is your definition of treason? 

[RYShh]

7 minutes ago, WeDoNotKneel_HailMance said:

OK. I will try to understand. What is your definition of treason? 

What's there not to understand? She burned the traitor alive. Not Tyrion and Sansa, because they didn't commit any treason. Telling the truth is one thing, committing treason another.

[WeDoNotKneel_HailMance]

4 hours ago, RYShh said:

That's Daenerys's problem not Sansa's. Tyrion is Daenerys's hand, why telling Daenerys's hand is a crime suddenly?

 

2 minutes ago, RYShh said:

What's there not to understand? She burned the traitor alive. Not Tyrion and Sansa, because they didn't commit any treason. Telling the truth is one thing, committing a treason another.

I thought we were having a discussion about whether or not Sansa committed the crime of treason. You had asked the initial question of why Sansa telling Tyrion about Jon's parentage is a crime. Looking at this definition of treason, it appears to me that when Sansa says "what if there is someone else, someone better" she is attempting to spread information in order to overthrow Dany.  

But anyways, if we're discussing whether or not Sansa committed the crime of treason, I thought it would be useful to be aware of your definition of treason because you may be viewing this in a different way. But we've probably taken this too far already, so I will stop now.