Jon killing Dany doesn’t work for me

[Kaapstad]

22 hours ago, Techmaester said:

The question was never if he was planning on killing Jon, clearly he wasn't going to based upon his sister. The question was did he purposefully conceal Jon's ancestry in an attempt to stop Jon from challenging Bobby's rule and continuing on the Targaryens and I think it's clear he did.  

Sansa revealing the information is an explicit attempt to cause problems, we both know it. You can't have it both ways, either Jon was so distraught over being a bastard, that it ate away at his identity(making Neds actions unacceptable) that he had to tell others. In which case he would obviously value it(which he didn't). Or he wouldn't care about it and thus wouldn't share it knowing the problems it would cause and the damage it would do his Aunt. 

About claim, ultimately Dany had the most claim as she has both the army and the ancestry. A king without an army isn't a king.(Also we're again ignoring that Jon supposedly gave up claim and Dany decided to fight at Winterfell without any real need to..) 

Like that stopped anyone ever.

And how does revealing him as a Targ magically cause Robert to step down and lay out a red carpet for Jon? It wont be long before assassins are sent after him. You can bet the Lannisters would be working overtime on that. At that point of time, the entire world hated Targs. Revealing his identity would not only be a death sentence for Jon, Ned would be hanged along with him for harbouring a Targ in secret. That's also probably the reason he didn't tell Catelyn. If he was ever caught, his family wouldn't suffer for it as it was Ned and his sister's personal issue.

Better Jon being distraught then him being dead. He told Sansa after he told Dany. When Jon tells Sansa the secret, its easy for her to understand why Jon is beholding her to silence. If the secret spread, its to Jon's benefit. If he is asking for it to be kept a secret, then it benefits only 1 person.Dany. She has no right to the throne yet she pushes for it, that's when Sansa has a hunch she is a tyrant and tells the secret to Tyrion AFTER she found out, her own Hand was afraid of her. She didn't tell him until that point. If the entire realm knows, it makes it that much harder for Dany to bump off Jon as the entire realm would revolt against her.

Sansa knows Jon isn't thinking straight when it comes to Dany. She plays a trick on him. She tells him Dany is pretty, to which Jon blushes and looks down. She asks him whether he bent the knee to save the North or because he loved her. He doesn't answer. Again. On top of that, he justifies each of her stupid decisions at the War Council. He is an army man and he is too blinded by love to see they are tired. That's when she takes matters into her own hands.

She doesn't have the ancestry. Jon has the claim to the throne. Only after his death does Dany have the claim. Jon has an Army. The Entire North. Jon bent his knee to her when he didn't know he was a Targ and the Rightful heir. That doesn't count. 

Dany only came to Winterfell because Jon promised his armies in support of her. It was a bilateral deal. She didn't come out of the goodness of her heart. She wanted to show off her dragons to the people of Winterfell to scare them (look at her smirk when people start screaming).

Yes him being the Lord Commander of the Nights Watch was what stopped the Boltons from invading the Nights Watch and killing Jon.

[Techmaester]

21 minutes ago, Kaapstad said:

And how does revealing him as a Targ magically cause Robert to step down and lay out a red carpet for Jon? It wont be long before assassins are sent after him. You can bet the Lannisters would be working overtime on that. At that point of time, the entire world hated Targs. Revealing his identity would not only be a death sentence for Jon, Ned would be hanged along with him for harbouring a Targ in secret. That's also probably the reason he didn't tell Catelyn. If he was ever caught, his family wouldn't suffer for it as it was Ned and his sister's personal issue.

Better Jon being distraught then him being dead. He told Sansa after he told Dany. When Jon tells Sansa the secret, its easy for her to understand why Jon is beholding her to silence. If the secret spread, its to Jon's benefit. If he is asking for it to be kept a secret, then it benefits only 1 person.Dany. She has no right to the throne yet she pushes for it, that's when Sansa has a hunch she is a tyrant and tells the secret to Tyrion AFTER she found out, her own Hand was afraid of her. She didn't tell him until that point. If the entire realm knows, it makes it that much harder for Dany to bump off Jon as the entire realm would revolt against her.

Sansa knows Jon isn't thinking straight when it comes to Dany. She plays a trick on him. She tells him Dany is pretty, to which Jon blushes and looks down. She asks him whether he bent the knee to save the North or because he loved her. He doesn't answer. Again. On top of that, he justifies each of her stupid decisions at the War Council. He is an army man and he is too blinded by love to see they are tired. That's when she takes matters into her own hands.

She doesn't have the ancestry. Jon has the claim to the throne. Only after his death does Dany have the claim. Jon has an Army. The Entire North. Jon bent his knee to her when he didn't know he was a Targ and the Rightful heir. That doesn't count. 

Dany only came to Winterfell because Jon promised his armies in support of her. It was a bilateral deal. She didn't come out of the goodness of her heart. She wanted to show off her dragons to the people of Winterfell to scare them (look at her smirk when people start screaming).

Yes him being the Lord Commander of the Nights Watch was what stopped the Boltons from invading the Nights Watch and killing Jon.

Telling Jon gives him the opportunity to embrace his actual heritage and pursue revenge for his fathers death and restore his family as the rightful heirs. Not telling him guarantees he will never get that opportunity. Obviously he couldn't do that without an army, his first move would have been to contact Dany but given the information is hidden from him it prevents the opportunity. 

Dany has a right to throne for obvious reasons both in terms of succession, contribution against the NK and military power and Jon actively telling her "ai dunt wunt eht".  Danys actions were completely successful, Kings Landing was destroyed and Cersei was dead - how could you say they failed? Her only failure was listening to her advisors(including Jon) instead of immediately burning the city back in season 7 so I don't think her actions were in any way wrong this season except her assumption Jon was going to be loyal to her(which in reality anyone else would have been). You're essentially admitting Sansa wanted to stir shit up to break up Jons relationships with Dany because of her own desire for power. This is hardly a selfless act. 

Dany didn't save Jon back in season 7 for her own benefit, why do you hang onto the idea she did it purely as a political move? She didn't need the Norths army or their support. She could have(and would have been better off) immediately laying waste to the rest of Westeros. 

[NymeriaWarriorQueen]

19 minutes ago, Techmaester said:

Dany has a right to throne for obvious reasons both in terms of succession, contribution against the NK and military power and Jon actively telling her "ai dunt wunt eht".  Danys actions were completely successful, Kings Landing was destroyed and Cersei was dead - how could you say they failed? Her only failure was listening to her advisors(including Jon) instead of immediately burning the city back in season 7 so I don't think her actions were in any way wrong this season except her assumption Jon was going to be loyal to her(which in reality anyone else would have been). 

Dany has no right to anything. She failed at  playing the Game of Thrones. As I mentioned in another post she lacked the political skills.  You NEVER  trust anyone (even lovers and kin) and her failure to recognize that Jon could get pass her dragon and kill her when her ideology didn’t line up with his was stupid.  Littlefinger taught Sansa to consider all the possibilities and outcomes in her mind and Dany didn’t do that. She thought that claiming the IT was her birthright and that she deserved it.  No humility. Just arrogance   In summary.....she didn’t play the Game of Thrones very well and so she ultimately lost.   She underestimated Jon.

[Techmaester]

1 minute ago, TheFirstofHerName said:

Dany has no inherent right to anything. She failed at  playing the Game of Thrones. As I mentioned in another post she lacked the political skills.  You NEVER  trust anyone (even lovers and kin) and her failure to recognize that Jon could get pass her dragon and kill her when her ideology didn’t line up with his was stupid.  Littlefinger taught Sansa to consider all the possibilities and outcomes in her mind and Dany didn’t do that. She thought that claiming the IT was her birthright and that she deserved it.  No humility. Just arrogance   In summary.....she didn’t play the Game of Thrones very well and so she ultimately lost.   She underestimated Jon.

Don't disagree with you there. I mean at the end of the day might does make right, she just let her love blind her.

Maybe this show had a bit of feminist propaganda in it afterall - once you get successful you'll get stabbed by your boyfriend. Doesn't seem to contribute to a message of harmonious relationships and sharing power. 

[Langsax]

I found myself ambivalent about Jon knifing the mad queen.  Maybe someday (but not holding my breath), George Martin will finish the saga, and we will know the straight skinny.

[NymeriaWarriorQueen]

9 minutes ago, Techmaester said:

Don't disagree with you there. I mean at the end of the day might does make right, she just let her love blind her.

Maybe this show had a bit of feminist propaganda in it afterall - once you get successful you'll get stabbed by your boyfriend. Doesn't seem to contribute to a message of harmonious relationships and sharing power. 

LOL.......Seriously though, do you really think GOT was meant to show a message of harmonious relationships and sharing power?  It has always been about political gamesmanship, backstabbing, betrayal, and murder regardless of gender or familial relationship.

[NymeriaWarriorQueen]

20 minutes ago, Langsax said:

I found myself ambivalent about Jon knifing the mad queen.  Maybe someday (but not holding my breath), George Martin will finish the saga, and we will know the straight skinny.

I hope so.  His story should be more fleshed out and understandable.   The POV chapters on Daenerys will hopefully give us her internal dialogue so that we can see her descent into madness.  All we got in the show was facial expressions which D & D had to explain in the recap prior to Episode 6 and then NO inside the episode at all at the conclusion of E6.  

[Kaapstad]

23 hours ago, Techmaester said:

Telling Jon gives him the opportunity to embrace his actual heritage and pursue revenge for his fathers death and restore his family as the rightful heirs. Not telling him guarantees he will never get that opportunity. Obviously he couldn't do that without an army, his first move would have been to contact Dany but given the information is hidden from him it prevents the opportunity. 

Telling Jon effectively kills him. Its that simple. Not telling him may mean he would never learn who he is but he survives. What is the priority? Informing him of his parentage and kill him or keep him alive? This really isn't anything new. In Harry Potter, Dumbledore leaves Harry at the Dursleys where he is treated like a doormat for 18 years so that he is protected by Voldemort. Or are you saying Dumbledore liked to see Harry being tortured?

Dany is on the other side of the world at that time. He likely hasn't even heard of her and whats the point? Even she does not have an army

23 hours ago, Techmaester said:

Dany has a right to throne for obvious reasons both in terms of succession, contribution against the NK and military power and Jon actively telling her "ai dunt wunt eht".  Danys actions were completely successful, Kings Landing was destroyed and Cersei was dead - how could you say they failed? Her only failure was listening to her advisors(including Jon) instead of immediately burning the city back in season 7 so I don't think her actions were in any way wrong this season except her assumption Jon was going to be loyal to her(which in reality anyone else would have been). You're essentially admitting Sansa wanted to stir shit up to break up Jons relationships with Dany because of her own desire for power. This is hardly a selfless act. 

Dany didn't save Jon back in season 7 for her own benefit, why do you hang onto the idea she did it purely as a political move? She didn't need the Norths army or their support. She could have(and would have been better off) immediately laying waste to the rest of Westeros. 

She does not have a right of succession before Jon

She contributed against the NK because Jon agreed to give her his army not out of the goodness of her heart

Jon kept saying "I don't want it" because she was seducing him and manipulating him. Remember Cersei's "The best weapon is between your legs"?

No. She failed by epic proportions. She said she wasn't her father and that she would leave the world better than her father did. Proven incorrect as she blew up the whole city even when they had surrendered. Even her father would be horrified as he only resorted to wildfire when he was cornered. She turned out to be worse than Aerys. She said she wouldn't be queen of the ashes. She reduced KL to rubble. Plan failed. Her plan never was to burn the city which is why she was asking her advisors.

Why would Jon be loyal to her after she burns Varys alive and then threatens to kill Sansa in front of him?

No Sansa wanted to protect Jon, that's why leaked his secret. That way Dany can't kill him by arranging an accident but do it in full public view. It was also to give an alternative to Tyrion so that if she truly goes off the rails, he can use this information to save the kingdom.

If Sansa wanted to be queen, she would have thrown her own name into the ring then and there. Brienne, Davos, Sam, Royce , Bran and Arya would have approved her.

She wasn't intending to use her dragons on KL. She wanted to do it the old fashioned way via armies. For that she needed Jon's army. That's why she tried to make a whole bunch of allies when she came to Westeros. She didn't want to be queen of the ashes.

[Techmaester]

5 minutes ago, Kaapstad said:

Telling Jon effectively kills him. Its that simple. Not telling him may mean he would never learn who he is but he survives. What is the priority? Informing him of his parentage and kill him or keep him alive? This really isn't anything new. In Harry Potter, Dumbledore leaves Harry at the Dursleys where he is treated like a doormat for 18 years so that he is protected by Voldemort. Or are you saying Dumbledore liked to see Harry being tortured?

Dany is on the other side of the world at that time. He likely hasn't even heard of her and whats the point? Even she does not have an army

She does not have a right of succession before Jon

She contributed against the NK because Jon agreed to give her his army not out of the goodness of her heart

Jon kept saying "I don't want it" because she was seducing him and manipulating him. Remember Cersei's "The best weapon is between your legs"?

No. She failed by epic proportions. She said she wasn't her father and that she would leave the world better than her father did. Proven incorrect as she blew up the whole city even when they had surrendered. Even her father would be horrified as he only resorted to wildfire when he was cornered. She turned out to be worse than Aerys. She said she wouldn't be queen of the ashes. She reduced KL to rubble. Plan failed. Her plan never was to burn the city which is why she was asking her advisors.

Why would Jon be loyal to her after she burns Varys alive and then threatens to kill Sansa in front of him?

No Sansa wanted to protect Jon, that's why leaked his secret. That way Dany can't kill him by arranging an accident but do it in full public view. It was also to give an alternative to Tyrion so that if she truly goes off the rails, he can use this information to save the kingdom.

If Sansa wanted to be queen, she would have thrown her own name into the ring then and there. Brienne, Davos, Sam, Royce , Bran and Arya would have approved her.

She wasn't intending to use her dragons on KL. She wanted to do it the old fashioned way via armies. For that she needed Jon's army. That's why she tried to make a whole bunch of allies when she came to Westeros. She didn't want to be queen of the ashes.

It's not Neds choice to make, your argument amounts to saying people should be lied to because if they aren't they might make a choice you disagree with. Also it's like saying it's better to live safely as a slave than die on a path to reach your full potential. It's not a belief I agree with.

Burning a traitor with dragon fire who attempted to kill you is completely reasonable, why wouldn't he be loyal at that point? She didn't threaten to kill Sansa...

Given that Cersei was dead and the Lannisters were starting to be purged I would say she was darn successful. I'm not really getting your argument though, on one hand you write Dany was always going to burn everyone down(and thus be "bad") on the otherhand you write she wanted to be "good"(consistent with your definition) and was goaded into making a destructive decision. Which is it? 

Dany could have killed Jon at any point, she didn't. Sansa was the one that gave a reason for Jon to be knocked off and yet Dany still didn't kill him and as we saw actually kissed him in the end.  

Nobody would have made Sansa queen, what an absurd statement.  

[Rose of Red Lake]

1 hour ago, Kaapstad said:

 Jon kept saying "I don't want it" because she was seducing him and manipulating him. Remember Cersei's "The best weapon is between your legs"?

Reminds me of:

"Lovebombing: technique used to recruit members to a cult or ideology by having an individual cut off a person from their existing social support and replacing it entirely with an individual who deliberately bombards the person with affection in an attempt to isolate the person from their family, prior beliefs, and value system."