Jump to content
A man doesn't have a name

People's reaction to Dany turning Mad Queen says something about us as humans

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, beeeeeen said:

wow, i did not know there were so many nut cases here...
Jon is the bad guy because he killed Dany before she could burn more people?
I hope those who think that also hate Jaime for killing Aerys...

Last I remember Aerys didn't repeatedly save Jamie at great personal risk, lend him his army or love him(literally or figuratively).

Jon was indefensible from the start of the season to the end. Had Arya killed Dany I would have disliked it but been OK with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Techmaester said:

Last I remember Aerys didn't repeatedly save Jamie at great personal risk, lend him his army or love him(literally or figuratively).

Jon was indefensible from the start of the season to the end. Had Arya killed Dany I would have disliked it but been OK with it.

even if Aerys had saved Jaime before, Jaime would have been right to stop him from burning the city... it's not about loyalty, it's not about debt, it's about saving peoples from a incoming danger...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, beeeeeen said:

wow, i did not know there were so many nut cases here...
Jon is the bad guy because he killed Dany before she could burn more people?
I hope those who think that also hate Jaime for killing Aerys...

For someone claiming to be smarter than everyone who signed the petition, your reading comprehension is pretty bad. 
The general consensus here is not that Jon is a piece of shit because he killed Daenerys, but Jon is a piece of shit because of the way he killed Daenerys.
The comparison to Jamie/Aerys is pointless, because of the vast difference between the characters. Jamie/Aerys most certainly didn't have the same history as Jon/Daenerys.

Also, what's with the constant ad hominem in your posts?
For a new member with few posts, you're almost coming across as a troll or flamebaiter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, beeeeeen said:

even if Aerys had saved Jaime before, Jaime would have been right to stop him from burning the city... it's not about loyalty, it's not about debt, it's about saving peoples from a incoming danger...

I don't agree you have a fundamental obligation to random people that justifies any action against your love who has saved you from death, who has risked themselves for you. Who has fought for you and who has shown a willingness to die for you. We apparently have a difference in values.

Beyond the love aspect, Dany saved the realm(without her it wouldn't have happened) from literal death. She could burn every major city and they would still owe her a debt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LucyMormont said:

Many fans praised Littlefinger for his "intelligence and manipulating skills", for example,  instead of rejecting him as the piece of s**t of human being he was. 

Really? Praised him? That's the first I've heard of that. I mean, I can acknowledge his skills of reading people and manipulating them, but he was a poisonous little weasel and I hated him.

4 hours ago, beeeeeen said:

It's not only that they try (or we try, because we are all like this at some point of our lives) to justify the bad actions of the peoples they idolize, it's also that they hate being wrong. That's why you can see a lot of the complaining peoples say things like "it would have been more credible if she had commited attrocities on innocent civilians before burning Kings Landing", which you can translate by "since i did not see it coming, it must be poorly written, my mighty intelligence could have never been fooled in normal conditions".

:lmao:I think that not wanting to admit that they were wrong was part of Tyrion and Jon's problem. I am not the most perceptive viewer/reader, in fact I am often embarrassed by what I miss, and I saw it coming a long time ago. I mostly liked Dany, and I wanted her to end up being good, but I just knew she wasn't. I could give examples, but someone else is doing it in another thread better than I could, so I'll leave it to him. At any rate, the fact that I saw it coming and so many others didn't, I think gives some credence to the your comment and the original comment in this thread.

And for the record, I think having her kill innocent civilians in KL prior to "the Bells', would have decreased the dramatic effect, which I like. It's boring if you know too much before the fact. You could see her considering as the bells rang, like she was remembering Tyrions pleas, and finally said "screw it". These people won't love me and must be sacrificed for the world I will usher in for the next generation. Could it have been written better, sure. but I do not think all the fault lies at the feet of D&D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MinscS2 said:

For someone claiming to be smarter than everyone who signed the petition, your reading comprehension is pretty bad. 
The general consensus here is not that Jon is a piece of shit because he killed Daenerys, but Jon is a piece of shit because of the way he killed Daenerys.
The comparison to Jamie/Aerys is pointless, because of the vast difference between the characters. Jamie/Aerys most certainly didn't have the same history as Jon/Daenerys.

Also, what's with the constant ad hominem in your posts?
For a new member with few posts, you're almost coming across as a troll or flamebaiter. 

to quote Jaime " if I stabbed the mad king in the belly instead of the back would you admire me more "
I am not a fan of Jon, i think he is an idiot, and his stupidity played a part in what happened, but he was right ending Daenerys' life, and he was right doing it that way because what else could he do? provoke her to a duel? Drogon would have come to the rescue, killed Jon, and Daenerys would have burn more people, starting with Winterfell. As i said, it was not about being loyal, it was not about being honorable, it was about stopping her before she killed more innocent.
And i don't do ad hominem, i am not attacking your person, or any person, i know nothing about anybody here, i am attacking the idea that killing a mass murderer before she could kill more peoples is worse than being a mass murderer...
I know, you will again tell me "you don't understand, it's not that he killed her, it's the way he did" but... i'm sorry, i don't believe you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Nowy Tends said:

says the guy who joined this forum 20 days ago with the hope of showing that everyone here is wrong… :rolleyes:

Hey!  Don't include me in 'everyone'  :)  That's a sweeping generalization if I ever read one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Techmaester said:

I don't agree you have a fundamental obligation to random people that justifies any action against your love who has saved you from death, who has risked themselves for you. Who has fought for you and who has shown a willingness to die for you. We apparently have a difference in values.

Beyond the love aspect, Dany saved the realm(without her it wouldn't have happened) from literal death. She could burn every major city and they would still owe her a debt.

Do you realize what you are saying? because she went to north to fight in Winterfell, she has a free pass to burn anyone she wants?
And Jaime? he went to Winterfell too, does he have the right to do whatever he wants? and Sandor? Gendry?
It was Jon's duty to stop her

Share this post


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

Beyond the love aspect, Dany saved the realm(without her it wouldn't have happened) from literal death. She could burn every major city and they would still owe her a debt.

A Protector of the Realm protects without the transactional condition. I know a certain Cheeto who sees everything as a tit for tat and transactional. A ruler protects because it's their job. If that's a problem, don't apply. 

Superman doesn't refuse to save people because they aren't "grateful" enough and a hero doesn't save people for the reward. Where the hell did this idea come from? The idea that one only saves people for payment of some sort is the worst sort of person. 

Edited by Lollygag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Heck.....I am just going to blame it all on the 3ER.  Bran is responsible for everything that happened.  He probably warged Dany and made her go mad and then he warged into Jon and plunged that knife into Dany.  Next he warged into Drogon and melted the IR.   I don’t trust him and I hope the prequel sheds some light on the origins of the first 3ER.

Edited by TheFirstofHerName

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lollygag said:

A Protector of the Realm protects without the transactional condition. I know a certain Cheeto who sees everything as a tit for tat and transactional. A ruler protects because it's their job. If that's a problem, don't apply. 

Superman doesn't refuse to save people because they aren't "grateful" enough and a hero doesn't save people for the reward. Where the hell did this idea come from? The idea that one only saves people for payment of some sort is the worst sort of person. 

Actually, thats exactly how the world works. How many police you see working for free? The reality is Dany contributed at great cost, a cost she had no obligation to pay(and would have been better off not doing it). Her contribution automatically grants her great leeway as far as I am concerned, particularly in handling those who didn't contribute.

The burning of Kings Landing was probably the most justified massacre in the entire show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Techmaester said:

Actually, thats exactly how the world works. How many police you see working for free? The reality is Dany contributed at great cost, a cost she had no obligation to pay(and would have been better off not doing it). Her contribution automatically grants her great leeway as far as I am concerned, particularly in handling those who didn't contribute.

The burning of Kings Landing was probably the most justified massacre in the entire show.

i am sorry because i will have to ad hominem you, like the other guy said, but if you really think what you just said... you are a horrible person... i really hope you are trolling...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Techmaester said:

I don't agree you have a fundamental obligation to random people that justifies any action against your love who has saved you from death, who has risked themselves for you. Who has fought for you and who has shown a willingness to die for you. We apparently have a difference in values.

Beyond the love aspect, Dany saved the realm(without her it wouldn't have happened) from literal death. She could burn every major city and they would still owe her a debt.

I'll restate something I stated in the Ep 5 threads.   Dany likely killed more people in a single day than the NK killed in the entire Second Long Night. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Techmaester said:

Actually, thats exactly how the world works. How many police you see working for free? The reality is Dany contributed at great cost, a cost she had no obligation to pay(and would have been better off not doing it). Her contribution automatically grants her great leeway as far as I am concerned, particularly in handling those who didn't contribute.

The burning of Kings Landing was probably the most justified massacre in the entire show.

Because something exists, that makes it ok. Murder, rape, pedophilia, abuse....exist. They're ok because that's how the world works. Dany's a villain of the worst sort (save people only if something's in it for you) and that's awesome by you. Got it. 

The job title was Protector of the Realm and if Winterfell fell, they'd have gone South. It was everyone's fight, including Dany's unless she said screw it and went back to Essos. It was personal with Dany (loss of Viseryon), it gained her the North and the Vale, and she fought the WWs when they were the weakest before they could gain even more dead and before they got further into Winter. The plan she greenlit also caused the whole thing by giving them the means to get through the Wall. If she was upset by the costs, she should have stayed in Essos instead of voluntarily choosing to start a completely unnecessary vanity war. That's all on her. 

Bold: Thanks for reminding me that people like you exist in the world. I tend to forget and fall under the false impression that we've collectively evolved. 

 

 

Share this post


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

I'll restate something I stated in the Ep 5 threads.   Dany likely killed more people in a single day than the NK killed in the entire Second Long Night. 

Unlikely and her purpose wasn't to end all life like the NK. Ignoring her inherent right to conquest  after the long night I think she would have simmered down after a while. Her reign in Essos wasn't all death but people seem committed to thinking it's all she would have done.

Anyway this is kind of deviating from Jon being irredeemable to something else. Betraying someone like he did was vastly worse than Dany scorching an enemy of her rule during an active war and I will stand by it. War is not personal but love is.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Techmaester said:

Unlikely and her purpose wasn't to end all life like the NK. Ignoring her inherent right to conquest  after the long night I think she would have simmered down after a while. Her reign in Essos wasn't all death but people seem committed to thinking it's all she would have done.

Anyway this is kind of deviating from Jon being irredeemable to something else. Betraying someone like he did was vastly worse than Dany scorching an enemy of her rule during an active war and I will stand by it. War is not personal but love is.

 

NO! first, it's not deviating from "Jon being irredeemable" as this thread is about the peoples complaining about Dany's mad turn and not about Jon's killing of Dany.
And once again if you think killing a mass murderer is worse than being a mass murderer you clearly have issues, huge issues.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, beeeeeen said:

NO! first, it's not deviating from "Jon being irredeemable" as this thread is about the peoples complaining about Dany's mad turn and not about Jon's killing of Dany.
And once again if you think killing a mass murderer is worse than being a mass murderer you clearly have issues, huge issues.....

Well, I don't think she was mad. I think in war people die and sometimes a scorched Earth policy is needed as was practiced for thousands of years. Kings Landing was clearly deserving of it.

I don't think you have an inherent obligation to other people in the face of what Dany did for Jon, certainly not one which can justify that level of backstabbing and exploitation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Empress Sansa said:

Remains whaaat? Flawless?? :rolleyes:

Certainly not to me. Or to all the Stark loyalists who have fallen in the Battle of the Bastards, after he "bravely" caused his own forces to charge on Boltons. But seems like the northerners don't mind dying and are all like CROWN.IT! Cause honestly, we need more Aragorn-like heroes in fantasy... -.-'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MinscS2 said:

Agreed. It doesn't matter who or what Daenerys was in the end - what Jon did to her (or more specifically, how he did it) resulted in pretty much the lowest, foulest, most sinister and dishonorable murder in the entire series - and that's saying something.

I guess Jon "kinda forgot" that Daenerys had not only saved his life twice (S7E6, S8E3) but also the life of pretty much everyone in Westeros only 3 episodes earlier. While she did have the blood of the population of King's Landing on her hands and where probably past the point of no return, she ultimately didn't deserve to go out like that: Stabbed without a word nor warning, by the last person she trusted and loved, after being tricked into kissing him.
She probably didn't even know or understand why he killed her, as her life left her. Would explain her look of absolute shock, disbelief and sadness as she died.

Jon's character was murdered this season almost as hard as Daenerys'.

Yet again, a character is made to act out of character, to fit the needs of the plot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, Daemos said:

Abused? The Tarlys are not innocent. They had a choice. They made it. How is this any worse than Arya's mass murder?

I have huge issue with the show's writing more than anything to do with Dany's arc per se - if you can even call it writing. On the specific point of the Tarlys, in the books, usually everyone is offered the choice of going to the Wall. But the show is anyway not the books, and applying Geneva conventions to POWs are modern values. In the middle ages, rebel barons were horribly executed (e.g. Robert the Bruce's brothers), unless there was some political or monetary gain in keeping them hostage.

Executing them is nothing Tywin would not have done of course. (Reynes and Tarbecks people) Olenna declared for Dany, the Tarlys are sworn to Highgarden, so even if you don't think Dany's view that she was always the rightful heir anyway applies, the Tarlys have broken their oath to the Tyrells. Definitely enough cause to be executed by medieval laws.

Was it the smart thing to do? No. Aegon I understood this well and also did well to start with the worst tyrant and subsequently forgiving everyone else (in most cases after defeating their armies).

Dany should have started with torching the universally unpopular Frey, and building support in the Riverlands (her last non-Targaryen ancestor was a Blackwood), while simultaneously protecting her allies in the South. A Lannister army marching out in the open would have been a perfect opportunity to defeat the enemy in the field and further gain credentials. The Tarlys could have been locked up to reconsider at.

I blame Tyrion and Varys for the horrible advice and lack of military intelligence. I guess the 'writers' wanted to convey that an angered Dany took bad decisions and was quick to execute prisoners. But from there to burning small folk is a huge stretch. Yeah, she reacted quite pettily to the frozen welcome she got in the North and her reaction when her Dragons, that already seemed juvenile, but from there to burning them all?

PS: Forget what I said about Tyrion and Varys's incompetence, they are not really behaving as in-universe characters, that's the writers as well obviously.

 

Edited by Ser Hedge

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

×